List recent conversations

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds value beyond them: the exact plain-text return format per line, the empty-state string 'No conversations yet.', and hard scope exclusions (no other people's chats, private, archived, or imported conversations). That is exactly the context an agent needs to interpret results correctly.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then usage, then return shape, then scope caveats — a sensible order with no filler sentences. Slightly verbose: 'Read-only' repeats the annotation and the exclusion list is long, but both carry real signal.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by specifying the exact line format and empty case. With one optional parameter and full annotation coverage, nothing an agent needs to call or interpret this tool is missing.

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 single 'limit' parameter is fully documented with default, range, and examples in the schema. The description adds no additional semantics about limit, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List the owner's most recent conversations with Sara'), plus ordering ('newest first') and per-item fields (title, last active, summary). It is clearly distinguishable from search_memory, which it names explicitly.

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?

Gives an explicit use case ('see what the owner has been talking about lately') and an explicit alternative with its own condition ('use search_memory to look for a topic across all of her memory'). The routing decision is fully determined.

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