List recent messages

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world behavior, so the burden is lighter. The description adds useful behavior beyond that: results are ordered newest-first, which affects how an agent reads pages. It does not spell out pagination behavior or result-volume expectations, keeping it just short of a 5.

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 sentences, zero waste. The core behavior and ordering are front-loaded, and the routing hint to the sibling tool comes last where it belongs.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be described, and pagination is documented in the cursor parameter. The remaining minor gap is that the description does not mention pagination or default page size, though the schema covers both adequately.

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 67%, with limit, cursor, and the two timestamps documented and the enum values self-explanatory. The description adds the semantic grouping that the filters compose (channel + status + creation time), which is more than the schema conveys on its own.

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 ('List recent messages'), adds ordering ('newest first') and the exact filter dimensions (channel, status, creation time). It explicitly contrasts with the sibling sendkuy_get_messages, so an agent can pick between them without opening either schema.

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?

Gives a concrete use case ('which WhatsApp messages failed in the last hour?') while debugging an integration, and names the alternative tool for a different need (checking specific messages). When-to-use, when-not-to-use, and the alternative are all present.

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