list_text_messages

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

With no annotations, the description covers pagination, auto-resolution of account_id, date window behavior, and return format. It notes potential 403 errors for missing A2P permission, but lacks explicit read-only declaration or rate limits.

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?

Well-structured with clear one-liner, organized Args and Returns sections. Every sentence adds value; no fluff or repetition.

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 tool with 7 parameters and output schema, the description covers pagination, filtering, and permission notes. Could include more edge cases (e.g., empty results) or detailed conversation structure, but adequate overall.

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 0%, but the description fully documents all 7 parameters, including defaults, format, and behavior (e.g., days ignored if start_date provided). Adds significant semantic value beyond schema.

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 lists SMS/text message conversations via CallRail trackers, with pagination and filtering. It distinguishes from siblings like get_text_message (single message) and list_calls (calls).

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 explains when to use (listing messages) and mentions prerequisites (A2P permission for outbound) and references create_text_message for more info. It does not explicitly name alternatives but context is clear.

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