list_messages

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates a safe read operation. The description adds only the vague term 'recent' without defining order, limit, or pagination, so it contributes little behavioral transparency beyond what the annotation provides.

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 concise, with two sentences that immediately state the purpose and document the parameter. It is front-loaded with no unnecessary information.

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 simple one-parameter read-only tool with an output schema, the description is largely sufficient. However, 'recent' is ambiguous and the description does not clarify message count, ordering, or any limits, leaving some gap in completeness.

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 description provides a brief explanation of the only parameter ('The numeric project ID'), which adds meaning to the schema's bare integer type. With 0% schema description coverage, this minimal explanation is necessary and somewhat sufficient.

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 tool lists recent messages/posts for a project, using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_message (single message) and create_message (writing).

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 when needing recent messages for a project but doesn't explicitly discuss alternatives or exclusions. It provides enough context for straightforward use but lacks explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over related ones.

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