get_person_messages

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for disclosing behavioral traits. It does not state whether the tool is read-only, if it accesses external APIs, or if there are rate limits or pagination. The description only lists parameters and return type, omitting critical behavioral context.

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 reasonably concise, using a clear docstring format with Args and Returns sections. It does not contain extraneous information, though the parameter explanations could be slightly more terse without losing clarity.

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 has 6 parameters and an output schema, the description covers the necessary input semantics and return type. However, it lacks context about expected behavior (e.g., whether results are sorted, if empty results are possible) and does not address edge cases or limitations.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, meaning no parameter descriptions within the JSON schema. However, the description includes a full docstring explaining each parameter's purpose, type, and default values. This fully compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions, adding significant semantic value.

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 retrieves messages sent by a specific person across all chats, using a specific verb and resource. This differentiates it from sibling tools like search_message_contents (which searches message content) and get_messages (which retrieves messages by other criteria).

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when not to use it, nor does it reference sibling tools. The agent receives no contextual direction for tool selection.

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