List LINE chats

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds valuable behavioral context: it returns stable chat IDs and excludes official accounts by default, which are not inferable from annotations alone.

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?

Three sentences, all informative and front-loaded. No redundant phrasing or filler; every sentence contributes purpose, usage, or an important exclusion.

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?

The tool has a rich input schema (5 params, all documented), an output schema, and annotations. The description covers purpose, usage timing, and key filtering behavior, making it complete for effective tool selection and invocation.

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 has 100% coverage with each parameter described (limit, unread_only, name_contains, updated_after, include_official). The description adds no additional parameter syntax or format details, so 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 states a specific verb ('Find') and resource ('LINE conversations'), and clarifies that it returns stable chat IDs, which directly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_messages and search_messages.

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?

Explicitly instructs to use this tool before get_messages when the chat ID is unknown, providing clear when-to-use guidance. It also notes the exclusion of official accounts unless requested, which sets expectations for filtering behavior.

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