get_messages

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

The description adds transparency beyond the schema by noting that tapbacks and system events are excluded. With no annotations, this is important behavioral context. It could go further (e.g., pagination behavior, rate limits), but the key exception is disclosed.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and no wasted words. The exclusion note is valuable and concise.

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 is relatively simple with 3 parameters and full schema coverage. The description covers the main behavior and a key exception. It lacks explicit mention of return format, but that is not required given the schema.

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 adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what is in the schema. The baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema fully documents parameters, though the description does not enhance their semantics.

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 reads messages from a conversation, newest first. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings but is unambiguous about its function.

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 implies usage for retrieving messages from a specific conversation and excludes tapbacks and system events. It does not explicitly mention alternatives, but the exclusion clarifies scope.

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