CPA: chats for a period (v1, deprecated)

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, etc. The description adds useful behavioral context: it reinforces read-only status ('Read-only, spends no money'), mentions pagination, and includes deprecation and rate limit details (v1 vs v2 limits). No contradictions with annotations.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the main purpose, and includes all critical information (function, deprecation, read-only, alternative). No unnecessary words.

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 lack of output schema, the description could mention the response format (e.g., list of chat objects), but it does state 'paginated list' and the tool is simple. Sibling differentiation, deprecation guidance, and safety hints are present. The description is largely complete for the tool's complexity.

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% parameter description coverage, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description ties 'created starting from the given moment' to dateTimeFrom, but adds no further parameter elaboration beyond the schema. 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 explicitly states the tool returns a paginated list of target CPA chats from a given moment, with a clear verb ('returns') and resource ('paginated list of target CPA chats'). It distinguishes from the sibling v2 by noting deprecation and recommending the alternative.

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 clearly advises preferring v2 due to higher request limits, and notes that the tool is read-only and spends no money. It does not explicitly mention when to use other siblings, but the deprecation guidance is strong and sufficient.

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