get_unread

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

No annotations, so description carries full burden. It discloses the critical side-effect: messages are NOT marked read, which is essential for a fetcher. Safe-read behavior is clear. Missing: pagination semantics for limit_per_chat across chats, and whether it includes archived/muted chats.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded, no waste, with the key non-mutating behavior embedded naturally.

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?

For a 3-param tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description states the core non-side-effect but omits parameter meaning and pagination. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 0% with 3 parameters. Description doesn't mention any of them (account, limit_chats, limit_per_chat). No defaults or format info added. The description names 'grouped by chat' which loosely maps to limit_per_chat but not explicitly.

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?

Clear verb+resource: returns unread messages grouped by chat. Distinguishable from read_chat and search_chat by the unread scope, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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?

Implied usage from 'unread messages' but no explicit when-to-use vs read_chat or search_chat, nor when-not. A helpful behavior note (no marking read) hints at use cases but not selection guidance.

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