list_dialogs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It does not mention sorting order, pagination, caching, permissions, or how filters interact. The parameter explanations are minimal.

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 very concise: one line for purpose, then a bullet-like list of parameters. No redundant text, front-loaded with the main action.

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?

With an output schema present, the description need not detail return structure. However, it omits ordering, default parameter interactions, and usage context relative to sibling tools. Adequate for a simple list tool but with gaps.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description provides Chinese explanations for all 5 parameters, clarifying limit (max 500), archived (archive folder), kind (dialog type), unread_only, and query (case-insensitive name filter). This adds meaning beyond schema property names.

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 '列出最近的对话（聊天列表）' (list recent dialogs/chat list), which identifies the verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling list tools like list_contacts by specifying 'dialogs' rather than contacts.

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 such as search_messages or get_chat_info. No conditions or exclusions are mentioned.

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