Get Message Event

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries full weight. It clearly implies a read-only operation ('Get statistics'), but does not disclose response format, pagination, error handling, or whether the result is for a single message or aggregated across messages.

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?

A single, focused sentence conveys the purpose without extra fluff. The structure is clean and directly informative.

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 (one parameter, no output schema), and the parameter is well-described. However, it lacks details on the return structure, possible values (e.g., counts, percentages), and any relationship to sibling statistics tools, leaving some context missing.

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?

The input schema already provides a complete description for requestId ('Request ID of a sent message'), achieving 100% coverage. The tool description adds no further meaning to the parameter, so it stays at the 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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves engagement statistics (impressions, clicks, other metrics), using the specific verb 'Get statistics'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_message_deliveries (delivery status) and get_statistics_per_unit (per-unit data) by focusing on user interaction metrics.

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 explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives such as get_message_deliveries or get_statistics_per_unit. The description implies usage for engagement analytics but does not state conditions or selection criteria.

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