im_chat_list

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It adds useful context by indicating the result is scoped to the current user and limited to 'recent' chats/channels. It does not, however, describe sorting, pagination details beyond the limit parameter, or the exact response shape, leaving some gaps.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the main purpose. Every part is useful and there is no redundant or filler content.

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 list tool with one documented optional parameter and no output schema, the description is adequately complete. It defines the scope (current user, recent) and the content (chats/channels). It could be slightly more detailed about return structure, but given the low complexity it does not need much more.

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?

The schema already fully describes the single parameter 'limit' with its default value, so the description does not need to add parameter details. The description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, which is acceptable given 100% schema coverage.

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 (list) and the resource (recent chats/channels of the current user). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like im_chat_messages (messages in a chat) and im_chat_find (search for chats) by explicitly scoping to a list of the user's chats/channels.

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?

Usage is implied: this tool should be used to get the current user's recent chats/channels. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over related tools such as im_chat_find or workgroup_chat_get, nor does it state exclusions or prerequisites.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.