agent_receive_messages

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

Discloses automatic decryption and signature-verification, which adds value. However, with no annotations provided, it lacks details on side effects (e.g., marking messages as read), authentication scope, or error behavior.

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?

Two concise sentences, action verb first, no unnecessary details. Extremely efficient.

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?

Basic function is clear, but missing context about pagination behavior, response structure (no output schema), and authentication scope. For a simple read tool, it is adequate but not thorough.

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%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The tool description does not add supplementary meaning, hence baseline score.

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 'Check inbox for incoming encrypted messages', a specific verb-resource pair. It distinguishes from siblings like agent_send_message or agent_read_channel by focusing on personal inbox retrieval.

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 usage guidance is given. The description does not explain when to use this tool versus alternatives like agent_read_channel or agent_verify_message, leaving the agent to infer.

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