in-app-message-list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions pagination and search, which are helpful behavioral traits, but lacks critical details like authentication requirements, rate limits, error handling, or what the response format looks like. For a list tool with no annotations, this leaves significant gaps.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads key information ('fetches a paginated list of in-app messages with search functionality'). Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or unnecessary elaboration.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and low schema description coverage (33%), the description is incomplete. It covers basic purpose but lacks details on behavior, response format, error cases, or usage context, which are essential for a tool with 3 parameters and search functionality.

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 33% (only 'searchKeyword' has a description). The description adds value by implying pagination ('paginated list') and search functionality, which aligns with the parameters, but doesn't explain semantics beyond what's minimally inferred. With low schema coverage, it partially compensates but not fully, warranting a baseline score.

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 ('fetches') and resource ('paginated list of in-app messages'), and specifies 'with search functionality' which adds useful detail. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'in-app-message-detail' or 'push-message-list', which would require a 5.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are multiple sibling list tools (e.g., 'analytics-chart-list', 'data-report-list', 'push-message-list') and detail tools, but no indication of context, prerequisites, or exclusions for this specific tool.

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