get_messages

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the burden. It explains read-only behavior, pagination via before_id, search filtering, and limit cap. It does not mention side effects, but for a read tool this is sufficient.

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?

Description is concise with a clear Args section. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy. Front-loaded with the core 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?

Despite no annotations, the description is complete: explains all 4 parameters, specifies return fields, and clarifies behavior like limit cap and pagination. Output schema is included, so no return value gaps.

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 0%, so description adds all parameter meaning. It explains chat as id/@username/title, limit as max 200 default 30, before_id for pagination, search as full-text filter. This exceeds what 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 reads recent messages from one chat, using specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like search_messages (which is for cross-chat search) and list_chats (which lists chats).

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 for a single chat but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_messages or send_message. No exclusion or context provided.

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