yougile_list_messages

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

Annotations already indicate a read-only, non-destructive operation, so the description's job is to add context. It adds useful behavioral details like the chatId being the taskId for task chats and that group chats are also supported. This goes beyond pure safety characterization.

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 two sentences: a clear, front-loaded statement of purpose followed by one crucial clarifying caveat. No wasted words, perfect size.

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 list operation with fully documented parameters, the description covers the key usage context (task vs group chats). No output schema exists, but the return values are self-evident for a message listing tool, so the description is sufficiently complete.

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 coverage is 100%, with each parameter having a descriptive comment. The description adds no new parameter details—the chatId mapping mentioned is already present in the schema's chatId description. Thus, it provides no added value beyond the schema, warranting the baseline score.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Get messages from a chat.' It also distinguishes itself from siblings like get_message (singular) and list_group_chats (list chats) by clarifying it handles both task chats and group chats, and by specifying the chatId mapping.

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 provides clear context for when to use it: for retrieving messages from a specific chat, including task chats (chatId = taskId) and group chats. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context makes the appropriate usage obvious.

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