codex_get_chat

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

The description discloses key behavioral traits: history summarization with DeepSeek, returning only the latest user/orchestrator message plus following raw messages. It mentions fallback sources. Since annotations are empty, the description effectively conveys the tool's behavior.

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, consisting of two sentences that front-load the main purpose and then add behavioral detail. It avoids unnecessary words, though it could be slightly more structured.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description does not cover the numerous parameters or guide their usage. For a tool with 14 parameters and many defaults, the description is insufficient for an agent to configure invocations correctly.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description adds no meaning to any of the 14 parameters. It does not explain the role of chat_id, project_id, range, or any of the include_* flags, leaving the agent to rely solely on the schema.

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 retrieves chat content from multiple sources (MCP hook history, Codex transcripts, legacy KB history) and explains the summarization behavior. It uses specific verbs like 'Get' and 'summarized', and the purpose is distinct from sibling tools like codex_get_chat_status or codex_list_active_chats.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as codex_search_chats or codex_list_active_chats. It lacks usage context or prerequisites.

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