get-chat-message

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds no additional behavioral context beyond the word 'Get', such as return format, error behavior, or relationship to other message operations.

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 filler or repetition. Every word earns its place, and it is appropriately sized for a simple getter.

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 read-only getter with two required parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate but incomplete. It provides no return-value expectations, no clarification of how chatId and messageId relate, and no mention of the sibling list operation, which would help an agent use it confidently.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3 even though the description itself adds no parameter detail. The schema's parameter descriptions ('Value for chatId', 'Value for messageId') are weak, but the description does not make them worse or introduce confusion.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('Get a single chat message') and the word 'single' distinguishes it from list-oriented siblings like list-chat-messages. However, it does not explicitly differentiate the chat resource from channel messages, leaving some ambiguity among get-chat-message and get-channel-message.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention list-chat-messages for browsing or get-channel-message for channel contexts, nor does it state any prerequisites or exclusions.

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