list_conversations

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention pagination behavior (despite limit/offset parameters), default values, whether archived conversations are included by default, or the return format. 'Lists all' is ambiguous given pagination, and no safety or side-effect context is given.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Every part adds meaning, and it is adequately structured for quick scanning.

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 has 3 optional parameters and no output schema, the description is minimal. It does not explain pagination semantics, archived conversation handling, or result shape. It also fails to provide distinctions from sibling tools beyond the phrase 'direct messages and group chats'.

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 only 33% (only include_archived has a description). The description adds no explanation for limit or offset, failing to compensate for the low coverage. It does not clarify how these parameters affect the listing.

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's purpose with a specific verb ('Lists'), a specific resource ('conversations'), and scopes it to 'direct messages and group chats' of 'the authenticated user'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_channels and list_broadcasts.

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 phrase 'Lists all conversations' implies use when retrieving conversations, but there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over list_channels or other listing tools. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned, leaving the usage context only implied.

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