list_conversations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds authentication details (app password with DM access), rate limiting, and a comprehensive list of return fields (id, members, unread count, mute state, status, last-message preview, cursor). No contradictions.

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, comprising two sentences with front-loaded purpose. The parenthetical endpoint detail is slightly verbose but not excessive.

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 tool's complexity (3 optional parameters, output schema present, annotations), the description comprehensively covers purpose, usage context, return format, authentication, rate limiting, and sibling tool references.

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% and the description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema for the three parameters (limit, cursor, status). The return field mentions cursor and status, but that is output, not parameter semantics. Baseline 3 applies.

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 lists the authenticated user's Bluesky direct-message conversations. It specifies the endpoint and service, and distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_conversation_messages and send_direct_message.

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?

Explicit guidance on when to use alternatives: 'Use get_conversation_messages to read a conversation and send_direct_message to reply.' Also mentions authentication requirements.

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