chat_list_messages

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

The description mentions 'recent' but does not specify ordering, default limit, or pagination behavior. The schema includes pageToken and maxResults, which inform some behavior, but the description itself adds minimal behavioral context. No annotations exist to supplement.

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 efficient sentence with no redundancy. Every word serves a purpose, and it is well-structured for quick comprehension.

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?

The tool has no output schema, so the description should ideally indicate what kind of response to expect (e.g., list of message objects). It does not, but the purpose is straightforward. The simplicity of the tool keeps this score from being lower.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions. It is consistent but not enriched.

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 clearly states the action (list) and resource (messages in a Google Chat space). The word 'recent' adds some context, but it does not differentiate from sibling tools like chat_get_message or chat_list_members, which have distinct purposes.

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 lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as chat_get_message for a single message or chat_list_spaces for space listing. No prerequisites, constraints, or contextual recommendations are provided.

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