read_messages

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

No annotations provided. Description claims reading by 'chat ID or contact name' but the input schema has zero parameters, creating a contradiction. No disclosure of read limits, permissions, or error handling.

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 is concise but omits critical details (e.g., how to specify chat). Not verbose, but incomplete.

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 output schema and no annotations, description fails to explain essential aspects: how parameters are supplied, return values, error cases, and differentiation from siblings beyond mentioning iMessage.

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?

Baseline is 4 due to zero parameters, but description adds semantic meaning that conflicts with schema (claims parameters exist but schema says none). This misleads rather than clarifies.

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?

Name and description clearly state the tool reads messages from an iMessage conversation, distinguishing it from sibling tools for other platforms like Signal, Teams, WhatsApp, and Zalo. The verb 'reads' and resource 'messages' are specific.

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?

Implicitly specifies iMessage context, but no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives (e.g., signal_read_messages). Also missing prerequisites like requiring a valid chat ID or contact name.

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