Список диалогов

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds that it indicates unread messages and operator status, but does not disclose pagination behavior or return format, so it provides only limited extra 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 a single, two-sentence statement focused on the action and key capabilities. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, with no unnecessary information.

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?

The combination of a clear description, thorough schema, and safety annotations provides sufficient context for a list operation. It could mention pagination defaults or return format, but these are not required given the schema details and read-only annotations.

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 covers all 7 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description's mention of filtering by bot, mode, and substring repeats the schema without adding additional semantic nuance, so the baseline 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 it lists bot conversations filtered by bot, mode, and substring, and mentions it shows unread and operator-led dialogs. This distinguishes it from sibling dialog tools like dialogs_get or dialogs_history.

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 as a listing tool but does not explicitly state when to use it vs alternatives or mention exclusions. It relies on the tool name and purpose to convey the use case, but lacks explicit guidance.

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