Get import job messages

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the HTTP method, endpoint, and 'Body fields: none', but does not disclose return format, authentication needs, or rate limits. No contradiction with annotations.

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 concise and front-loaded with the action, followed by the endpoint, body note, and reference. Each sentence earns its place, though the reference URL is arguably optional.

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 simple read-only GET, annotations and schema cover safety and query parameters. However, there is no output schema and the description does not describe the shape or content of the returned messages, nor does it clarify when this tool is the right choice among import-related siblings.

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 query parameter is well-documented in the schema with sortBy, sortOrder, offset, limit, comma-joining, and explicit pagination behavior. The description adds 'Body fields: none' and shows importId as a path parameter via the endpoint, but it does not explain what importId refers to or how to obtain it.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Get import job messages') and includes the exact endpoint, making the tool's function clear. It is distinguishable from sibling tools like xmatters_get_import_jobs and xmatters_get_an_import_job by the 'messages' resource, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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 guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus related import tools such as xmatters_get_import_jobs or xmatters_get_an_import_job. The endpoint implies it is for retrieving messages for a specific import, but there is no explicit context, exclusions, or alternative routing.

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