iam_chat_tail

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose key behaviors. It mentions 'enforcing private-channel membership' (authorization) but doesn't clarify if it's read-only, whether it streams or polls, limits, or side effects (e.g., marking messages as seen). The name 'tail' suggests streaming but description says 'read recent' adding ambiguity.

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?

Single sentence efficiently conveys the core action and a key constraint. However, it lacks structure (e.g., bullet points or sections) and could benefit from parameter hints or usage examples.

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 is too terse. It fails to mention return value structure, pagination, or whether it supports streaming. Given moderate complexity (3 params) and no annotations, the description is insufficient for complete understanding.

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 0% and description provides no parameter details. Three parameters (channel, lines, date) are completely undocumented in both schema and description, leaving the agent to guess their formats, meanings, or constraints.

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?

Describes a specific verb ('read recent chat messages') and resource ('chat messages'), and adds a distinctive constraint ('enforcing private-channel membership'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like iam_chat_post (send) and iam_inbox (email).

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?

Only states what the tool does but provides no guidance on when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., iam_chat_seen for marking read, or other read tools). No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use context.

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