ig_get_messagesRetrieve the 20 most recent messages from an Instagram conversation using its conversation ID, including sender, recipient, and text.
Messages of one conversation with sender, recipient and text. Instagram only returns the 20 most recent messages.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| conversation_id | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: Instagram caps results at the 20 most recent messages, which tells the agent the result set is truncated. It stops short of saying whether pagination exists to reach older messages.
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?
Two short sentences with no filler; the return-shape note comes first and the truncation caveat second. Telegraphic phrasing but nothing wasted.
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?
For a single-parameter read tool with annotations covering safety and no output schema, the description covers purpose, return fields and a result limit. The only real gap is the meaning/acquisition of conversation_id.
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?
There is one parameter with 0% schema description coverage, and the description never explains conversation_id — not its format, pattern (^[\w-]+$), or where to obtain it. The word 'conversation' appears, but that does not compensate for the undocumented required 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?
States a specific resource (messages of one conversation) and even previews the return fields (sender, recipient, text). This distinguishes it from ig_list_conversations and ig_send_message, though the verb 'Get' lives in the name rather than the description.
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?
Usage is only implied by the resource scope: fetch messages inside a single conversation. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of the sibling ig_list_conversations for discovering a conversation_id, and no exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.