List DM events

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It discloses ordering (newest first), maximum limit (up to 100), and the dm.read scope requirement. However, it does not detail pagination behavior beyond the limit, nor what constitutes a DM event.

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 a single sentence that efficiently captures the core purpose, constraints, and auth requirement. Every element earns its place with no redundancy.

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 read tool with no output schema, the description covers essential behavior: scope, ordering, limit, and auth. However, it doesn't describe the event structure or how the two participant identifiers interact, which could cause usage questions. Overall, it is reasonably complete given the tool's simplicity.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it only reinforces the max of 100 which already exists in maxResults. It does not clarify the relationship between username and participantId, but the schema descriptions cover them adequately.

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 DM events in a 1:1 conversation with a participant, specifying the verb (read), resource (DM events), and scope (1:1 conversation). It also distinguishes from siblings like list_dm_inbox and list_dm_conversation_events by focusing on the 1:1 participant context.

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 reading DM events with a participant, and provides the prerequisite of dm.read scope. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over alternatives like list_dm_conversation_events, nor does it state when not to use it.

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