missive_list_conversation_messagesList the messages (emails) in a conversation. Missive: GET /conversations/{id}/messages.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | The resource id (a UUID-like string). | |
| limit | No | Max messages to return (default 10, max 10). | |
| until | No | Unix timestamp cursor — return records older than this (offset-less pagination). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is known. The description adds the API endpoint but discloses no additional behavioral traits like pagination behavior, default limit, or response structure.
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?
Description is very short and front-loaded with the core action. It could be slightly more informative without becoming verbose, but it is concise.
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 no output schema, the description should clarify return format or pagination behavior. It omits important details like the default/max limit of 10 and the 'until' cursor, leaving gaps for an agent.
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 100%, so the schema already explains the parameters. The tool description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, justifying the baseline score.
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?
Clearly states 'List the messages (emails) in a conversation', which is specific and distinct from sibling tools like add_comment or get_message. The API endpoint reinforces the action.
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?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_message or other list tools. No explicit context about when it's appropriate.
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.