get_emails

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden of disclosing behavior. 'Retrieve' implies a read-only operation, and 'from inbox' scopes the behavior. However, it doesn't specify what 'recent' means, return format, or any prerequisites like authentication. The text is minimal but not misleading.

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 two short sentences with no filler. It is front-loaded with the action and quickly states scope. Every word earns its place.

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 has no annotations, no output schema, and schema descriptions are absent. The description only gives a high-level action and scope, but fails to explain parameter semantics or what the returned emails look like. This is inadequate for an agent to reliably invke the tool with correct arguments.

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 schema provides two parameters (limit and accountId) with zero description coverage. The description does not mention these parameters at all, so an agent has no guidance on what values to pass or what they control. This is a critical gap for a tool with undocumented 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 the tool's function: 'Retrieve emails from Nextcloud Mail app.' It specifies the resource (emails) and the action (retrieve), with scope ('from inbox'). Since all sibling tools are for different domains (tasks, calendar, notes, files, deck), this tool is unambiguously distinct.

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 clear context that this tool fetches recent inbox emails from the Nextcloud Mail app, making its intended use apparent. There are no sibling email tools, so no explicit alternatives are needed. However, it could explicitly state when not to use it, but this is a minor gap.

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