neuron_get_messagesRetrieve messages from a specific conversation in chronological order, with optional cursor-based pagination.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Unique identifier (UUID) of the conversation | |
| limit | No | Maximum number of messages to return per page | |
| cursor | No | Opaque pagination cursor from a previous response for retrieving the next page |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare idempotent, read-only, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds value by mentioning chronological ordering and cursor-based pagination, which are key behavioral traits beyond the annotated safety profile.
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?
The description is a single sentence of 12 words, efficiently conveying the tool's core functionality without any redundant information. It is well-structured and front-loaded with the action and resource.
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?
Given the absence of an output schema, the description provides sufficient context (chronological order, pagination) for an agent to understand the tool's behavior. It covers the main aspects needed for invocation, though it could hint at the return format (e.g., array of message objects).
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?
All parameters are already described in the input schema with 100% coverage. The description adds context about pagination (cursor) but does not provide additional meaning beyond what the schema offers, especially for the 'id' and 'limit' parameters.
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 clearly states the action (retrieve), the target resource (messages from a specific conversation), and key features (chronological order, optional cursor-based pagination). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like send_message, edit_message, and delete_message.
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?
While the purpose is clear, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as neuron_bot_api_get_messages or neuron_get_conversation. The usage context is implied but not stated, which is adequate for a simple tool.
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.
Most tools are clearly separated by resource type, but there is meaningful overlap in messaging entry points (send_message, send_whatsapp, compose_message, bot_api_send) and contact ingestion/sync tools (import_contacts, populate_contacts, sync_whatsapp_contacts). The descriptions help disambiguate, but with 309 tools an agent will frequently need to read closely to pick the right one.
The overwhelming majority of tools follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern: create_*, get_*, list_*, update_*, delete_*. Minor deviations like sales_stats, lead_stats, wallet_balance, and whoami break the pattern slightly, but overall naming is highly predictable.
309 tools is an extreme count for any MCP server, even a broad platform. This creates significant cognitive load and navigation overhead for agents, and far exceeds the well-scoped 3-15 tool range where coherence is strongest.
The tool surface is remarkably comprehensive across bots, contacts, campaigns, flows, knowledge bases, personas, marketplace, wallet, and products. Minor gaps exist — lead sources lack update/delete tools, and there is no single get_task or get_webhook alongside their list/update/delete counterparts — but these are workable gaps rather than dead ends.