Nova

Read messages

read_messages

Retrieve the caller’s unread care-circle messages, oldest first, and mark them as read so no care update is missed.

Instructions

Read the caller's unread messages from the care circle, oldest first, and mark them read.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "read_messages"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 24, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Explicitly discloses the side effect 'mark them read', which explains the non-readOnly and non-idempotent annotations rather than contradicting them. Ordering ('oldest first') is also given; it stops short of saying whether a second call returns nothing or whether read state can be undone.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single dense sentence that front-loads the scope (caller's unread messages), then ordering, then the mutation. No filler, nothing restated from the title.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With an output schema present and zero parameters, the description only needs to cover behavior, which it mostly does. It leaves open whether all unread messages are consumed in one call or only those returned, a minor gap for a consuming operation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the schema has nothing to explain; the description correctly adds no spurious parameter talk. The only implicit semantic, 'unread only', is already covered in the main sentence.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Specific verb (read) plus resource (unread messages from the care circle) with ordering and side effect stated, so the agent knows exactly what happens. It does not name the closely related sibling read_notifications, so the boundary between messages and notifications must be inferred from names alone.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The word 'unread' implies the triggering condition, but there is no explicit when-to-use, no exclusion (e.g. don't call repeatedly since messages get consumed), and no mention of read_notifications as the alternative for alerts/notifications.

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