browse_conversations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It discloses sorting semantics ('date' newest first, 'size' largest first) and the default limit, but does not state that it is read-only, whether pagination exists, or any permission/auth constraints.

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 brief and front-loaded, with an Args section that is easy to scan. Minor waste/ambiguity is the 'and/or date' phrase, which is not backed by a parameter.

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 a simple browse tool with an output schema, the parameter documentation is mostly sufficient. However, it lacks usage guidance and contains a misleading date-filter implication, so it is adequate but not 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It documents all three parameters and adds sort_by values beyond the schema, but the opening claim 'by topic and/or date' suggests a date filter that the schema does not contain, creating ambiguity.

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 (Browse) and resource (conversations) with filter dimensions. It does not differentiate from siblings such as search_history, so an agent still has to infer which tool is appropriate.

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?

No when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative guidance is given. The phrase 'by topic and/or date' describes scope but not selection context against list_all_topics, search_history, or the other siblings.

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