treeflow_list_conversations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'lists the most recent conversations' without explaining ordering, pagination, response format, side effects, or what 'recent' means. This is minimal behavioral transparency.

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, focused sentence with no wasted words. The core action is stated upfront and there is no redundant information. It is appropriately concise for a simple list tool.

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?

The tool is simple (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), and the description gives a basic understanding of the action. However, it does not explain what the response contains, how 'most recent' is determined, or that the tree_id is a required filter. These gaps make it minimally adequate rather than complete.

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 coverage is 100% and the parameter 'tree_id' is described as 'ID del bot/árbol'. The description does not add any meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies. It slightly reinforces the connection to 'this bot' but provides no additional parameter detail.

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 states a specific verb ('Lista') and resource ('las conversaciones'), clearly indicating that the tool lists conversations. It is distinct enough from sibling 'get_conversation' which implies retrieving one conversation, though it does not explicitly name that alternative.

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 phrase 'más recientes' (most recent) gives implied usage context: use this to fetch recent conversations. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives, and no exclusions. The usage is implicitly clear but not explicitly stated.

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