read_messages

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It fails to disclose behavioral traits such as pagination, number of messages returned, or whether it reads all or recent. Additionally, the description mentions parameters ('by chat ID or contact name') that do not exist in the input schema, creating confusion.

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, no wasted words, but too terse. Lacks structure that would help an agent quickly parse key information.

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?

Lacking output schema and behavioral annotations, the description should provide more context about return format, limits, or side effects. It is incomplete for effective use.

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% (zero params), but the description adds parameter information that contradicts the schema (mentions chat ID or contact name). This misalignment reduces confidence in selecting the tool.

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 states the verb 'reads' and resource 'messages from an iMessage conversation', and specifies scope by chat ID or contact name. It is clear but does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'search_messages' or 'list_message_chats'.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies it is for reading specific conversations, but lacks explicit context or exclusion.

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