list_family_chat_messages Get recent family chat messages.
Args:
after_id: Only return messages after this ID (for polling)
limit: Maximum messages to return (default: 50, max: 100)
Returns:
List of chat messages
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| after_id | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already cover readOnly/idiompotent/destructive safety. The description adds useful behavior beyond annotations: after_id semantics for polling and the limit max of 100, which is not in the schema. It does not mention ordering or pagination beyond these, but the 'recent' keyword implies a common ordering.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A focused docstring with a one-line purpose, concise parameter explanations, and a returns line. No fluff, and the key purpose is front-loaded.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple read-only list tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, parameters, and return type. It could be more explicit about ordering (e.g., newest first), but 'recent' and the polling hint cover most expectations.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries full burden. It fully explains both parameters: after_id for incremental polling and limit with default and max. This adds meaning the schema lacks.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description states a clear verb and resource: 'Get recent family chat messages.' It is distinct from send/edit/delete family chat message siblings, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself. The resource is specific enough that an agent can identify it.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description implies usage through 'for polling' and the after_id parameter, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like send_family_chat_message or get_family_activity. No exclusions or alternative routing are provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.