Messages List Attachments

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

The description discloses no behavioral traits whatsoever — it does not mention filtering behavior, pagination, return format, or any side effects. The readOnlyHint and idempotentHint annotations are the only useful safety signals, and the description adds nothing beyond 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 sentence, nominally short, but it is under-specified rather than concise. It earns no place because it contains no functional information — it is packaging text, not tool documentation.

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?

Despite having an output schema and 4 parameters, the description explains nothing about what the tool does, when to invoke it, or what its parameters control. An agent would have to rely purely on the tool name and annotations, which is completely inadequate for correct selection and invocation.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and 4 parameters (limit, offset, chat_id, message_id), the description was required to compensate but mentions none of them. An agent cannot infer the meaning of any parameter from the description.

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, 'Delegated Apple domain tool messages_list_attachments exposed through Apple-Tools-MCP', is a tautology that merely restates the tool name and adds infrastructure boilerplate. It never states the verb+resource action (listing attachments from messages) with any functional content. Even the title is just the name expanded.

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?

There is zero guidance on when to use this tool versus any of its siblings such as messages_get_message, messages_search_messages, or messages_list_conversations. No use cases, exclusions, or alternative routing are mentioned anywhere.

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