list_chats

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose all behaviors. It mentions ordering and a prerequisite but does not discuss pagination behavior, rate limits, or whether the tool is read-only. Since it's a list operation, the lack of destructive behavior is implied but not explicitly stated.

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 brief and efficient, two sentences covering purpose, ordering, prerequisite, and use cases. No superfluous information.

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 simple list tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, ordering, prerequisite, and usage scenarios. It could be improved by noting that the tool does not support filtering beyond the provided parameters, but overall it is adequate.

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 both parameters (page and per_page). The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema, just the ordering context. It does not elaborate on parameter formats or constraints beyond what is in the schema.

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 verb 'list', the resource 'Zendesk Chat conversations (live chat transcripts)', and the ordering 'most recent first'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_tickets by specifying the chat domain.

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 a prerequisite ('Requires Zendesk Chat to be enabled') and specific use cases ('end-of-day chat reviews' or 'find a recent chat by visitor name'). It does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or list alternatives, but the context is clear enough.

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