grove_get_thread

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds the fact that it 'Requires grove_read' permission, which is useful context beyond the annotations. However, it doesn't describe any other behavioral traits, such as whether the thread is flattened or nested, or any ordering.

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 very concise, with two sentences that get to the point. The primary action and key parameter are front-loaded. It could be improved by adding a brief note on when to use it, but for its size, it is well-structured.

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 tool is simple with one key parameter and no output schema. The description conveys the core purpose and the required parameter. However, it lacks detail on the expected output format (e.g., does it return a list of messages?) and any special behavior like error conditions. Given the low schema coverage, it could be more complete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. The description mentions 'message_id: ID of the parent message', which adds clarity to the purpose of that parameter. However, it does not explain the role of app_id at all, so the coverage is incomplete.

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 retrieves 'a message and all its replies', specifying the resource (message thread) and the action (get). It is distinguishable from siblings like grove_get_history and grove_get_identity by explicitly mentioning replies.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusions or conditions are given. 'Requires grove_read' is a prerequisite, but not usage guidance.

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