list_chats

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

The description is minimal and only states the primary action. It does not disclose the meaning of 'recent', the effect of the optional limit parameter, the response structure, or any authentication or rate-limit requirements. With no annotations to supplement, this is a significant transparency gap.

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, front-loaded sentence with no redundant or unnecessary words. It immediately conveys the core action, achieving maximum conciseness with minimal effort.

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 the tool's simple nature, the description omits critical context such as the definition of 'recent', the response format (no output schema), and the semantics of the limit parameter. This incompleteness could lead to incorrect usage or misinterpretation of results.

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?

The input schema defines a single optional 'limit' parameter with no description (0% schema_description_coverage), and the tool description does not mention this parameter at all. The agent gains no information about how 'limit' controls the number of returned chats, making the parameter essentially opaque.

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's function using the verb 'List' and the resource 'recent chat sessions', distinguishing it from similar tools like chat_history which likely handle individual messages. However, it does not explicitly mention alternative scenarios or compare itself to siblings, preventing a perfect score.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as chat_history or list_history. It neither states appropriate contexts nor exclusions, leaving the agent without decision-making information.

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