list_emails

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It fails to mention pagination (after, limit), mailbox selection, direction filtering, or that it is a read-only operation. Only the output fields are listed, leaving critical behavior undocumented.

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 sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states purpose, the second lists output fields. Efficient, though could be slightly more informative without becoming verbose.

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?

With 5 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is too brief. It omits pagination, mailbox selection, direction filtering, and does not explain the structure of the response. The tool is moderately complex and needs more context.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meanings beyond summarizing output fields. It does not clarify the direction parameter's role, which is central to the tool's filtering.

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 states it lists sent emails and shows specific fields, which is clear. However, it is misleading because the schema includes a direction parameter that allows filtering for inbound as well, contradicting the 'sent' claim. This vagueness prevents full differentiation from sibling list tools.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like get_email for single retrieval or send_email for sending. No exclusions or prerequisites mentioned.

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