get_message

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

The description states it returns exact timestamp and content, adding behavioral context. It also indicates an archived, read-only operation. However, with no annotations, it does not disclose potential outcomes like message not found or error handling, making it adequate but not rich.

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?

A single sentence with no redundancy. Every word contributes: the verb, the resource, the identifiers, and the returned data. Well front-loaded for quick scanning.

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 fetch operation, the description covers the core purpose, identification parameters, and return value. It lacks details on failure behavior or response structure, but given the tool's simplicity and sibling context, it is fairly complete.

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?

Since schema description coverage is 0%, the description compensates by clarifying that chatId is a chat JID and id is a message id, adding meaning beyond plain string type declarations. It also implies their role in locating the message, though format specifics are absent.

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 uses a specific verb 'Fetch' and identifies the resource as a 'single archived message' with the exact identifiers (chat JID and message id). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get_history (multiple messages) and get_attachment.

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 context is clear: use this to fetch one specific archived message by its chat and message IDs. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives, but the single-message phrasing makes the intended use obvious.

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