get_error_messages

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 only states that it retrieves common error messages, omitting important behaviors like default sorting, date filtering, pagination limits, or whether this is a read-only operation. The schema hints at options like sort by userCount or lastSeen, but the description does not contextualize these behaviors.

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 extraneous words. It is front-loaded with the main purpose. However, it is arguably too terse for a tool with six parameters, but this dimension rewards efficiency, and the description is appropriately sized without 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 complexity (six parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is inadequate. It fails to provide context about how this tool differs from siblings, what the results look like, or when to use it. The description is a minimal stub that leaves the agent without essential decision-making information.

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 description coverage is 100%, so each parameter is fully documented within the schema itself. The description adds little beyond the schema—it does not explain how parameters map to the 'most common' concept beyond what the sort enum already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already handles parameter semantics.

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 'Get most common error messages' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating a retrieval tool focused on aggregated error messages. It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_errors by emphasizing 'most common', suggesting a frequency-based aggregation. However, it could be more explicit about what fields are returned and how 'most common' is determined.

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. Sibling tools get_errors and get_error_details are not mentioned, and there are no hints about appropriate contexts for using this tool, such as identifying top error messages for triage.

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