Get one message

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive traits. The description adds meaningful behavior beyond them: it says the message is returned decrypted and explains that quoted messages appear in `quotes` with resolved messages in `quoted_messages`.

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 sentences with no wasted words. The core action is front-loaded, followed immediately by the special quote-resolution return behavior.

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 read-only single-message fetch with rich annotations and full schema coverage, the description covers purpose, input forms, decryption, and quote resolution. It stops short of clarifying whether id or url is required when both are optional in the schema, and it does not relate the tool to thread or list siblings.

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 100%, so the schema already documents id, url, and resolve_quotes. The description restates the id/permalink lookup but adds no syntax or behavior beyond the schema, so the 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 gives a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('a single message'), and explicitly distinguishes the singular fetch from the plural sibling get_messages. It also names the two supported lookup forms (id or Rocket.Chat permalink), so the agent can identify the tool without opening the schema.

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 when you have a message id or permalink, but it does not state when to prefer this over get_messages, get_thread, or search, nor does it give exclusions. The context is clear enough for basic selection but lacks any explicit alternative routing.

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