list_chats

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of explaining behavior. It does disclose useful behavior: sorting by most recent, filtering by name fragment, and type-to-group/DM mapping. It does not state whether this is a read-only operation, what happens with pagination/limit, or what the response shape contains, though an output schema exists.

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 compact, front-loads the primary action, and then provides one terse instruction per parameter. No filler or redundant restatement of the tool name is present.

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 simple listing tool with an output schema, the description covers the core call shape well. It is incomplete in that 'limite' is not described and no guidance is given about when list_groups would be the better sibling choice; still, an agent can invoke the tool successfully with the information provided.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds genuine meaning for three parameters: 'busca' filters by contact/group name, 'tipo' enumerates 'all'/'group'/'dm', and 'instance' supports name-or-number with empty-as-default. Only 'limite' is left unexplained beyond its title/default.

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 opens with 'Lista conversas ordenadas pela mais recente', a specific verb, resource, and sort order. It does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling list_groups, but 'conversas' plus the type filter makes the scope reasonably clear.

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 concrete field-level usage: 'busca' is a contact/group name fragment, 'tipo' accepts 'all'/'group'/'dm', and 'instance' falls back to default. However, it never says when to prefer this tool over a sibling such as list_groups, and it does not state any exclusions.

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