Get Conversation Timeline

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses caching behavior, pagination mechanism, and the structure of returned items (type field). However, it does not mention error handling or rate limits, which would be helpful.

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 concise with 6 sentences. It front-loads the main purpose, then structure, caching, pagination, and alternative tool. 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 tool has 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is remarkably complete. It covers the result structure, caching, pagination, and alternative tool usage. An agent can use this tool correctly without additional context.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining how older_than relates to pagination (oldest_timestamp from previous response) and clarifying body_format options (preview=500 chars, truncated=max_body_length).

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 tool returns all messages, posts, and comments in a conversation as a chronological timeline. It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_message (individual messages) and get_conversation (metadata).

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?

Explicitly tells when to use the tool (for timeline view) and when to use the sibling get_message (for full body content). Also provides pagination instructions for backward navigation.

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