getRecentChatLog

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions the tool retrieves messages 'for moderation context', which hints at a read-only, informational purpose, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as whether it requires authentication, rate limits, or how it handles errors. This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior.

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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose and context without any wasted words. It is front-loaded and appropriately sized for a simple tool.

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 simplicity (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is adequate but minimal. It covers the basic purpose and context, but for a tool with no annotations, it could benefit from more behavioral details (e.g., response format, error handling) to be fully complete.

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 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately doesn't add parameter details, earning a baseline score of 4 for not introducing unnecessary information.

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 verb ('Get') and resource ('last 20 chat messages'), specifying the exact scope and quantity. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'analyzeChat' or 'sendMessageToChat', which prevents a perfect score.

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 context ('for moderation context'), suggesting when this tool might be appropriate, but doesn't provide explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like 'analyzeChat' or when not to use it. The context is helpful but lacks specificity about alternatives.

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