get_messages

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. "Fetch" implies a read-only operation, and the optional timestamp filter discloses a behavior. However, it does not describe return format, ordering, pagination, or whether messages are marked as read, leaving notable gaps for a fetch tool.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It states the core function and an optional parameter in a concise manner, scoring highly on efficiency.

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 only two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main purpose and optionality. However, it omits expected return structure, potential errors, or any preconditions (e.g., task must exist), making it minimally complete but with clear gaps.

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 50%, and the description does not fully compensate. For 'since', the description merely repeats the schema's description. For 'taskId', it provides context by linking it to a task's thread, but the meaning of the parameters is still largely left to the schema. The description adds some clarity but not enough to fully cover the gap.

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 uses a specific verb "Fetch" and a clear resource "a task's conversation thread," which distinguishes it from sibling tools like post_message (write) and get_task (task details). The optional timestamp filter is also mentioned, providing a clear scope.

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 implies the tool is used to retrieve message threads for a task and mentions an optional filter, but it does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives or any exclusions. No alternatives are named, and there is no guidance on when not to use it.

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