get_messages

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It only says 'Get recent messages' and offers the 'me' tip. It does not explain return format, ordering (e.g., ascending/descending), how fromMessageId affects results, or any safety/authorization aspects. This is a significant gap for a tool with no annotations.

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 consists of two concise sentences, with the most important information front-loaded. There is no redundant filler, and every word serves a purpose.

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 has no output schema and no annotations, so the description should compensate. It gives a basic usage statement but omits behavioral details like pagination logic (fromMessageId), default ordering, and response structure. While the schema covers parameters well, the overall contextual completeness is only adequate, not rich.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds the word 'recent,' which implies ordering, but it largely repeats the chatId 'me' tip already present in the schema. It does not add meaningful semantics for 'limit' or 'fromMessageId' beyond what the schema provides.

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's function: 'Get recent messages from a specific chat.' This uses a specific verb (get) and resource (messages from a chat), and it is clearly distinct from sibling tools like search_messages or get_message_context. The added tip about using 'me' for Saved Messages further clarifies the scope.

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 clear context for when to use the tool: when you need recent messages from a specific chat. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the contrast with siblings like search_messages or get_message_context is implicit. The 'me' tip gives additional usage guidance.

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