List Session Messages (v3)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds the generic notion of 'optional filters' but does not disclose additional behavioral details like pagination behavior, ordering, or how filters interact. It neither contradicts annotations nor adds significant context beyond them.

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?

A single sentence, 'List messages in a v3 session, with optional filters,' is extremely concise and front-loaded. Every word earns its place, and there is no redundant 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?

Given the tool's simplicity and the rich schema/annotations, the description is minimally sufficient, but it fails to differentiate from the many sibling session-related tools and does not mention pagination or return behavior. It lacks any contextual cues that would help an agent decide when to use this tool over others.

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 schema provides 100% coverage for all 5 parameters, so the description's generic mention of 'optional filters' adds no meaning beyond what the schema already documents. The baseline of 3 applies because the schema does the heavy lifting and the description does not compensate with extra detail.

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 action ('List'), the resource ('messages in a v3 session'), and the optional filters, making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes from sibling session-level tools (e.g., lyzr_session3_list) by focusing on messages rather than the session itself.

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 listing messages in v3 sessions, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as lyzr_session_history or lyzr_session_conversation. There are no exclusions or contextual hints beyond the basic action.

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