Read messages

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It discloses that the tool returns messages in reverse chronological order and that reading message content requires specific intents. However, it does not mention potential rate limits, error handling, or what happens when intents are missing (e.g., content will be empty).

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?

Two sentences: first states purpose and ordering, second adds a critical prerequisite. No extraneous information; every sentence is essential and front-loaded.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description does not specify the return format (e.g., list of message objects with fields like id, content, author). It also does not mention pagination or the effect of the 'limit' parameter on the result. Given the presence of many sibling tools and the lack of annotations, additional detail would improve completeness.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning to the parameters beyond what is already in the schema; it does not explain the 'newest last' ordering in relation to parameters or provide context for the 'server' parameter's optionality.

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 'Read the most recent messages from a channel (newest last)', specifying the action (read), resource (messages), and ordering (newest last). This distinguishes it from siblings like send_message, delete_message, or edit_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?

The description mentions the prerequisite of DISCORD_PRIVILEGED_INTENTS and Message Content intent for reading text body, but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus other read operations like get_pinned_messages or search (if such tool existed). Implied usage context is present but not comprehensive.

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