Forward messages

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, which provide some behavioral context. The description adds little beyond stating the action; it does not clarify side effects like whether messages are copied or moved, but this is typical for forward operations.

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 with no redundant information. It is well-structured and directly conveys the tool's purpose.

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 side-effect operation, the description is sufficient given the clear schema and annotations. It does not explain return values, but no output schema exists and the operation is straightforward, so this omission is acceptable.

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 schema covers all parameters (from, to, message_ids) with clear descriptions (e.g., 'Chat to forward from.'). Since schema coverage is 100% and the description adds nothing beyond the schema, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 specific action (forward) and resource (messages from one chat to another). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like send, edit, and delete by describing a unique operation.

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 implies usage (when you need to copy existing messages to another chat), but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or conditions for choosing this tool over others. The guidance is minimal and relies on inference.

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