clickup_chat_message_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and does well by disclosing key behavioral traits: pagination method ('v3 cursor pagination'), ordering ('newest first'), scope limitation ('Only top-level messages are returned'), and return format ('Returns an array of message objects plus a next_cursor'). It doesn't mention rate limits or auth requirements, but covers essential operational behavior.

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?

Four tightly-packed sentences with zero waste. Front-loaded with core purpose, then sibling differentiation, then pagination details, then return format. Every sentence earns its place by adding essential 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?

For a list tool with 100% schema coverage but no annotations or output schema, the description provides complete operational context: purpose, sibling differentiation, pagination behavior, ordering, scope limitations, and return format. No output schema exists, so describing the return format is appropriate and helpful.

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%, so the schema already fully documents all three parameters. The description adds context about pagination ('pass the 'cursor' from the previous response') and ordering ('newest first'), but doesn't provide additional semantic meaning beyond what's in the parameter descriptions. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 specific action ('List messages'), resource ('in a ClickUp Chat channel'), and scope ('newest first'). It distinguishes from sibling tools by explicitly mentioning 'clickup_chat_reply_list for threaded replies' and 'clickup_chat_channel_list' as the source for channel IDs.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use alternatives ('use clickup_chat_reply_list for threaded replies'), prerequisites ('Obtain from clickup_chat_channel_list'), and pagination behavior ('pass the 'cursor' from the previous response to page further back'). Also mentions when to omit parameters ('Omit for the first page').

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