get_messages

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already communicates that this is a read-only operation, but the description adds no further behavioral context. It does not mention what data is returned, any limitations, or system effects, so the description contributes nothing beyond the annotation.

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, which is concise, but it carries minimal informational value beyond the tool name. It is not necessarily bloated, but it also does not earn its place by adding meaningful detail, making it borderline adequate.

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?

Despite having no parameters and an output schema, the description is too vague to be complete. It fails to specify the source, type, or scope of the messages, and the presence of many sibling notification tools means the agent cannot reliably infer which messages are meant.

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?

With zero parameters, the schema is trivially complete and the description need not explain any inputs. The baseline score of 4 is appropriate because there is no parameter information to provide.

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 '获取消息通知' is essentially a Chinese translation of the tool name 'get_messages', providing no additional specificity about what kind of messages or notifications are retrieved. It does not distinguish this tool from sibling tools such as get_notifications or get_realtime_notices, making it a tautological restatement.

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 gives no indication of when to use this tool versus the many related sibling tools for notifications or messages. There is no mention of context, alternatives, or exclusions, leaving the agent without guidance for tool selection.

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