List Message Threads

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description does not need to reiterate that. It adds value by describing the return structure ('list of threads with members, last activity and message count') and the optional context_type filter, which are beyond what annotations provide.

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 extremely concise: a single opening sentence, a structured arg list, a return description, and usage examples. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 complexity (no required params, simple parameters, read-only, idempotent), the description fully covers what the agent needs: purpose, parameters (with defaults and constraints), return structure, and example triggers. No 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 100%, providing baseline clarity. The description adds context for the account parameter (e.g., linking to freelancer_list_accounts) and clarifies default behavior for limit and offset. This extra guidance slightly improves semantics beyond the schema.

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 'List' and the resource 'Freelancer.com inbox message threads,' making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like freelancer_get_messages (which retrieves messages within a thread) and freelancer_send_message.

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?

Usage examples are provided (e.g., 'Show my inbox', 'List my message threads'), giving clear context for when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly exclude cases where alternatives like freelancer_get_messages would be more appropriate.

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