Read channel messages

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds sorting ('newest first'), return format details, and output format options. It also mentions the limit parameter. This adds value beyond annotations, though it could specify that only top-level messages are returned.

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 very concise: a single sentence for the action, followed by a bullet list of parameters and a return format description. No unnecessary words, front-loaded with the main operation.

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?

Given the absence of an output schema, the description includes the return structure which is helpful. It covers all parameters and their sources. However, it does not mention pagination or behavior when no messages exist, and it could clarify that replies are not included.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description restates parameter information in a readable format but does not add new semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides (types, defaults, constraints).

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 explicitly states 'Read recent top-level messages from a team channel, newest first.' It uses a specific verb ('read') and resource ('top-level messages from a team channel'), and distinguishes from siblings like teams_get_chat_messages (chat vs channel) and teams_send_channel_message (write vs read).

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 the tool is for reading messages, not sending or replying. It mentions top-level messages, which excludes replies. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use. Sibling tools provide context, but the description could be more direct.

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