get_recent_messages

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, which the description aligns with (it is a read operation). The description adds a behavioral nuance: it returns the 'most recent' messages, implying time-based ordering. However, it does not disclose other behaviors like pagination details or order direction, which the many pagination parameters suggest are important.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose. It is efficient with no extraneous words. However, given the complexity of parameters, a bit more detail could be added without becoming verbose.

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?

The tool has 9 parameters and likely complex retrieval logic, but the description only covers the basic purpose. It lacks information on default behavior (e.g., sort order), interaction between parameters (e.g., time range vs limit), and output format (no output schema). The absence of this context makes it challenging for an agent to construct correct calls, especially with filters and pagination.

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 for parameter documentation. It only explains session_id and part of limit ('recent N'), but does not explain the meanings of offset, start_time, end_time, sender_id, text_only, message_types, or page_size. Given the 9 parameters and 0% coverage, the description fails to add meaningful semantics for most parameters.

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 a specific verb ('get'), resource ('recent messages'), and scope (specified session, N most recent). It clearly communicates the core function. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_messages_by_sender or get_message_context, which have overlapping purposes.

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 implies usage for retrieving recent messages from a session, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as search_messages, get_messages_by_sender, or get_message_context. Sibling tools with similar functions exist but are not mentioned, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate use case.

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