client_getChatsByLabelId

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not add behavioral context beyond the basic operation. It fails to disclose whether the label must exist, what happens when labelId is omitted (schema marks it optional), or whether pagination is involved. The description merely restates the function without deeper insight into side effects or edge cases.

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 phrase with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the verb 'Get' and the resource 'chats', making it easy to parse and understand immediately.

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 simple nature of the tool (two parameters, no output schema), the description covers the core purpose adequately. However, the optional labelId creates ambiguity, and the lack of any return value or error behavior explanation leaves gaps for an agent. The description is minimally viable but not comprehensive.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for both labelId and sessionId, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, such as format details or relationships between parameters.

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 'Get all chats for a specific label' with a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like client_getChats (all chats) and client_getChatById (single chat). The phrase 'specific label' adds scope, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 a label ID is available, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or conditions for when to use this tool versus client_getChats or client_getChatLabels. No exclusions or prerequisites are stated, leaving usage guidance to inference.

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