chatgpt_list_conversations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It states the tool lists recent conversations and mentions a default limit, which is useful. However, it doesn't disclose details like whether it only shows a fixed number, whether it includes archived chats, or any side effects (though it's clearly a read operation). The description is adequate but not rich.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the purpose and includes the key detail about the sidebar and resuming chats. No wasted words.

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 tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description is complete enough. It explains what the tool does and why you'd use it. It could mention that the output includes IDs, but that's implied by 'topics and IDs.' The sibling context shows this is part of a chat management suite, and the description fits well.

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 100% for the single 'limit' parameter, which is already described as 'Maximum number of recent conversations to retrieve (default: 30).' The description adds the context of 'recent' and 'sidebar' but doesn't add much beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema fully documents the parameter.

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 conversation history topics and IDs from the ChatGPT sidebar, with the purpose of selecting and resuming previous chats. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like chatgpt_new_chat and chatgpt_ask by focusing on listing existing conversations.

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: use this to get conversation IDs for resuming chats, which is clear context. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the purpose is specific enough that an agent can infer it's for browsing history before selecting a conversation.

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