Retrieve a full conversation thread including all incoming and outgoing posts by providing the conversation ID.
Get a single conversation with its full thread of posts (incoming + outgoing).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Conversation ID | |
| apiKey | No | Send16 API key (overrides SEND16_API_KEY env var) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.5.7Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states it retrieves data (non-destructive) but does not mention any limitations, authentication requirements, or side effects.
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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and resource. No unnecessary words.
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 retrieval tool with one required parameter and no output schema, the description adequately explains what is returned (full thread of posts). Could mention metadata, but sufficient.
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 the schema already documents both parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what is in the schema, earning the baseline score.
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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'a single conversation with its full thread of posts (incoming + outgoing)', distinguishing it from list_convos and other conversation-related tools.
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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_convos or when not to use it. The description lacks context for selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.