Get Messages

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral detail beyond that: chronological ordering and one-message-per-line output, which affects parsing. It says nothing about truncation behavior or result size expectations.

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 short sentence that front-loads the resource, then scope, then output shape. No redundant wording and nothing that could be trimmed without losing content.

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?

With full schema coverage, an output schema handling return values, and annotations covering the safety profile, the definition carries its remaining burden adequately. A brief note on what happens when the message count exceeds limit would close the last gap, but that is already in the schema.

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 all four parameters (chat, limit, since, until) are already documented with formats and defaults. The description only restates the period concept implied by since/until and adds no syntax or precedence detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Mensagens de uma conversa') plus scope ('num período') and output ordering ('em ordem cronológica, uma por linha'), which is enough to distinguish it from list_chats and search. It stops short of naming the siblings it differs from.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance and no exclusions — nothing tells an agent whether to use this versus 'search' for message retrieval. Only an implicit hint exists: it operates on a single conversation, which the schema ties to list_chats.

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