Retrieve a thread from a specific environment with paginated history. Use turn limits and cursors to inspect conversation turns without loading the full log.
Read one thread from an explicitly selected environment with bounded, paginated history.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| threadId | Yes | ||
| turnLimit | No | ||
| beforeCursor | No | ||
| environmentId | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| error | No | ||
| thread | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so no extra safety disclosure is needed. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond the schema by noting the history is bounded and paginated, which tells the agent the result can be limited and paged rather than a single unbounded dump.
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 front-loaded sentence contains the core operation, the scope constraint, and the pagination behavior. Every word earns its place and there is no redundant restatement of the tool name or schema fields.
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 read-only tool with rich annotations and an output schema, the description covers the main invocation context: what environment, what thread, and the bounded/paginated nature of the result. It does not spell out parameter details or pagination cursor semantics, but those are partially inferable from the schema and the description's keywords.
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%, so the description must compensate. It hints at environment selection via 'explicitly selected environment' and at turnLimit/beforeCursor via 'bounded, paginated history', but it never explicitly maps these concepts to parameter names or explains their interaction. This is partial compensation, not full.
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 opens with 'Read one thread', a specific verb and resource, and adds that it operates on an explicitly selected environment with bounded, paginated history. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like start_turn and continue_turn, which imply mutating or advancing a thread rather than reading it.
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 phrase 'Read one thread' makes the primary use case obvious: retrieve the history of a single thread in a chosen environment. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it stops short of full routing guidance, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select it over list or turn-mutation tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.