xchat_list_conversations

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It openly discloses that private message previews are returned, that previews use placeholder text for non-text attachments, and that results are ordered by newest activity first. This is strong transparency, though it omits details like rate limits, authentication, or error behavior.

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 well-structured and appropriately concise. It front-loads the core purpose, includes a necessary privacy note, specifies the output JSON structure, and documents arguments. Each section serves a distinct purpose without redundancy or fluff.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (two optional parameters) and no annotations, the description covers all essential aspects: what it does, output format, parameter constraints, and a privacy caveat. It is complete enough for an agent to invoke the tool correctly without additional context.

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?

The description adds significant meaning beyond the input schema. It provides explicit ranges for 'limit' (1-500), clarifies the default (50), and explains 'unread_only' as filtering to conversations with unread messages. The schema only has titles and defaults, so these details are essential and well-covered.

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 tool's function with a specific verb ('List') and resource ('XChat conversations'), and adds sorting criterion ('newest activity first'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like xchat_get_history, which likely focuses on message history within a conversation.

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 provides clear context on what the tool does and highlights a privacy caveat about returning private message previews from the user's machine. While it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, the purpose is well-scoped and the note implies caution appropriate for the tool's nature.

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