search_emails

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

No annotations provided; the description covers filter syntax but lacks behavioral details such as read-only nature, pagination, limits, or error handling. It implies a search operation but does not clarify side effects.

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 extremely concise without waste: two sentences plus examples, front-loaded with purpose. Every part adds value.

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 no output schema and moderate complexity, the description covers query syntax well but omits return format, default folder/account behavior, case sensitivity, and error conditions, leaving gaps for an agent.

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 descriptions already cover all parameters (100% coverage). The description adds value by providing concrete examples of valid query syntax and listing operators, enhancing understanding beyond schema.

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 'Search emails using himalaya filter syntax', providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'list_emails' by emphasizing filter syntax.

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 gives examples and operators but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like 'list_emails' or 'read_email', nor when not to use it.

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