Retrieve all messages in a topic to view the complete conversation thread. Use it to access full message history for review or analysis.
Get all messages in a topic.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| topic | Yes | Topic to filter by |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v4.0.0Input schema / $schemaPrevious value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"Input schema / additionalPropertiesRemoved value: -falsev2.8.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Without annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get all messages', which implies a read-only operation, but does not describe return format, ordering, pagination, or any potential side effects. Minimal value added beyond the tool name.
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?
Single sentence, directly to the point, no wasted words. Properly sized for the simplicity of the tool.
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 is simple (one param, no output schema, no annotations) and the description covers the basic purpose. However, it lacks context about how 'topic' is identified, what the return value contains, and how it relates to sibling tools like get_agora_thread. Adequate for a trivial getter but not fully complete.
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% (one parameter 'topic' described as 'Topic to filter by'). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, but the schema is already clear. Baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 'Get' and the resource 'all messages in a topic'. It is specific enough to distinguish from sibling tools like get_agora_topics (list topics) and get_agora_thread (likely a thread view), though it does not explicitly differentiate.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_agora_thread or get_agora_topics. The description lacks any context about use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.