get_messages

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

Describes the basic action and a permission constraint but lacks details on pagination, error handling, rate limits, or what happens with invalid conversation IDs. With no annotations, more behavioral disclosure is needed.

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 concise sentences with no wasted words. Could be slightly improved by grouping information more logically, but it's effectively brief.

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 having an output schema (so no need to describe return values), the description omits parameter guidance and behavioral context for a 3-parameter tool. Incomplete for an agent to use correctly.

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 0%, yet the description adds no information about parameters like limit, account, or conversation_id. The agent must rely solely on the schema, which lacks descriptions.

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 "Read messages in a DM conversation," specifying the verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like send_message (write) and list_conversations (list conversations, not messages).

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?

Only provides a prerequisite (requires Meta App Review), no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_conversations or search tools. The agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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