get_message_thread

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It mentions attachment URLs are included, which is useful, but says nothing about permissions, pagination, read-only status, error behavior, or whether the thread must exist. For a retrieval tool with no annotations, this is a significant gap.

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 short sentence with no wasted words, but it is arguably too minimal to be helpful. It is front-loaded and efficient, but lacks necessary detail.

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?

With an output schema present, the description needn't explain return values, but it does mention attachment URLs, which is a helpful pointer. However, for a 1-parameter tool with no annotations, the description should at least state that it is a read operation and what the thread_uid refers to. It is moderately complete but leaves notable gaps.

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%, but there is only one parameter (thread_uid) and its type is clear. The description implies the parameter is a thread identifier, which is the bare minimum. However, it does not explain the format, source, or constraints of thread_uid, so it adds little beyond the schema's name.

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 ('hent' / retrieve) and resource ('alle meldingene i en tråd' / all messages in a thread), and clarifies it includes attachment URLs. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like list_message_threads and read_message_attachments, though the description is only one sentence.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. Sibling names like list_message_threads suggest a possible confusion, but the description offers no routing information, conditions, or exclusions.

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