upservice_get_chat_messages

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description is not required to disclose read-only behavior. It adds return type ('JSON list of messages') but does not elaborate on pagination or other side effects beyond what the schema provides.

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 concise (three sentences) and follows a clear structure: purpose, Args, Returns. No extraneous information, though it could be slightly more front-loaded.

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 good annotations and schema coverage, the description is adequate for a read operation but lacks usage guidance relative to sibling tools. It does not explain prerequisites or output structure beyond mentioning a JSON list.

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?

The input schema provides descriptions for each parameter (channel_unique_identifier, room_uuid, limit, offset) with details on defaults and constraints. The description merely lists parameter names without adding new meaning, so it is redundant.

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?

Description clearly states 'Get messages for a specific chat room within a specific channel,' specifying the verb and resource scope. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tool 'upservice_list_chat_messages', which could cause confusion.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., list_chat_messages, send_chat_message). The description only states what the tool does without context for selection.

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