Read Grok Bot messages

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

Goes beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations by disclosing a real side effect: specifying an agent opens that chat in the app. It also tells the agent the response includes a pending multiple-choice question, which matters for follow-up calls. Ordering/pagination behavior is not covered.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler, and the core read purpose is front-loaded ahead of the secondary open-chat behavior.

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 two-optional-parameter read tool with annotations and no output schema, the description covers what it returns (recent messages plus any pending question) and the side effect of specifying an agent. Minor gaps like message ordering are acceptable.

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 100%, so both parameters are already documented (prefix matching, case-insensitivity, count default/max). The description only hints at the agent parameter's effect ('opens that chat'); the baseline 3 applies since the schema carries the semantics.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Read recent messages from an agent chat in Grok Bot') and adds the distinguishing capability of surfacing a pending multiple-choice question. That clearly separates it from send_message and answer_choice.

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?

Usage is only implied: you read messages to see what an agent said or to discover a question awaiting an answer, which routes to answer_choice. There is no explicit 'use this when' or 'do not use for' statement naming the sibling tools.

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