list_inbox

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses default exclusion of completed tasks, but does not mention ordering, pagination, or the effect of the status parameter. Basic behavioral traits are covered minimally.

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 a single sentence of 10 words, very concise and front-loaded. However, it lacks structure (e.g., sections), but the brevity is appropriate given the tool's simplicity.

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?

For a list tool with 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description provides essential filtering context but omits parameter semantics and response details. It is adequate but incomplete.

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%, and the description does not explain any of the three parameters (status, limit, includeScheduled). It only implies default filtering ('not completed by default'), leaving agents to guess parameter meaning.

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 lists 'Inbox tasks' and qualifies them as 'unscheduled, personal, not completed by default.' This verb+resource combination is specific and distinguishes from siblings like list_schedule or list_myday.

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 use this tool versus alternatives is given. The qualifiers implicitly suggest use for unscheduled personal tasks, but there is no mention of when not to use or alternative tools like list_myday or list_schedule.

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