get_message_context

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that the tool fetches the target message with surrounding messages, but omits details about rate limits, required permissions, error handling, or the nature of the returned data. The schema indicates default values for before/after, but the description does not mention them.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wordiness. Every word is meaningful, and there is no redundancy.

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 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too brief. It does not clarify how the surrounding messages are ordered, what format the response takes, or any limits beyond schema constraints. The tool's core purpose (providing context) is stated, but critical details for correct invocation are missing.

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 only 17% (only guild_id has a description). The description adds minimal meaning by referencing 'surrounding messages before and after', which hints at the 'before' and 'after' parameters but does not explain their syntax, range, or behavior. With low schema coverage, the description fails to compensate adequately.

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 verb 'fetch', the resource 'one Discord message plus surrounding messages', and the scope 'before and after it'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like read_channel_messages which likely fetches messages without context around a specific one.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when not to use it or which sibling tools to choose for different contexts. The agent is left to infer usage from the description alone.

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