add_message

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility. It discloses that adding to a resolved thread reopens it and optionally refreshes actions/tags, but lacks details on idempotency, permissions, or side effects beyond reopening.

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 three concise sentences, front-loading the core purpose. No extraneous information, each sentence adds value.

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 four parameters, zero schema descriptions, and no output schema, the description omits essential details for required params (thread_id, text) and does not describe expected output or error conditions.

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 coverage is 0%, yet the description only mentions optional refresh of 'actions' and 'tags', leaving required parameters 'thread_id' and 'text' completely unexplained. The text property's schema reference is erroneous, further reducing clarity.

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 appends an agent message to a thread in Markdown format, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_thread or reopen_thread. The verb 'append' and resource 'message' are specific and unambiguous.

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 implies usage context (e.g., adding to a resolved thread reopens it) but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives like reopen_thread. No direct when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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