consulter_messages

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

The verb 'Récupère' signals a read-only retrieval operation and the word 'reçus' narrows the scope, which is useful. However, with no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does not disclose potential side effects, authentication needs, or return shape.

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 focused sentence with a front-loaded verb and object. Every word contributes to identifying the resource and scope, with no filler or redundant detail.

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?

Given the zero-parameter schema and simple read action, the description is adequate for selecting and invoking the tool. However, there is no output schema and no mention of what fields the returned messages contain, so the description is not fully complete for downstream use.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds useful context about the data source (EcoleDirecte messaging), but there are no parameters to document or clarify further.

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, 'Récupère', and names a clear resource: 'les messages reçus dans la messagerie EcoleDirecte du compte'. It also distinguishes itself from siblings like consulter_notes, consulter_devoirs, and consulter_absences by targeting the messaging channel rather than grades or homework.

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 clearly implies when to use the tool: whenever the agent needs to retrieve received EcoleDirecte messages. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state exclusions, so it stops short of a 5, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select this tool over its siblings.

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