clickup_chat_reply_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return format ('Returns an array of reply objects') and ordering behavior ('oldest first'), which is valuable. However, it doesn't mention pagination, rate limits, authentication requirements, or error conditions that would be important for a list operation.

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?

Two sentences with zero waste. First sentence states purpose, scope, ordering, and return format. Second sentence provides clear usage guidance with an explicit alternative. Perfectly front-loaded and appropriately sized.

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 read-only list tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description does well by specifying the return format and ordering. However, it could be more complete by mentioning pagination behavior or typical response structure. The sibling tool reference adds good context, but some operational details are missing.

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 both parameters. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema descriptions. The baseline is 3 when the 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 the threaded replies'), target resource ('attached to a top-level ClickUp Chat message'), and ordering ('oldest first'). It distinguishes from sibling tools by specifying it's for replies (not messages) and references clickup_chat_reply_send as the alternative for posting replies.

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?

Explicitly provides when to use this tool ('List the threaded replies') and when to use an alternative ('Use clickup_chat_reply_send to post a new reply'). It also implicitly distinguishes from clickup_chat_message_list by focusing on replies rather than top-level messages.

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