get_monitor_messages

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It mentions filtering and custom ordering, but does not specify if the operation is read-only, rate limits, authentication needs, or what happens with no filters (e.g., returns all). Partial but not comprehensive.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with core action and purpose. Each sentence adds value. No unnecessary repetition, but could be slightly more streamlined.

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 description explains filtering and ordering, but lacks information on return structure, pagination, or limits. For a query tool without output schema, this is a gap. It is adequate but not fully 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 individual parameter descriptions. The description adds context about flexible filtering and custom ordering, but does not specify valid values for order_by. Since the schema already carries the burden, the description adds minimal extra value.

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 it queries chat/message history with filtering. It distinguishes from siblings by emphasizing flexible filtering and custom ordering, but does not explicitly compare to similar monitor tools like get_monitor_sessions.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. Alternatives like get_monitor_session_messages are not mentioned. The description only says it's 'essential for debugging' but lacks context on when to prefer this over sibling tools.

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