list_sent_emails

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read. The description adds what a record contains (recipients, delivery status), which is genuine value, but it says nothing about ordering defaults, pagination limits, or how company scope is resolved when company_id is omitted.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with no filler, and the resource and returned content come first. It is efficient, though for a six-parameter filtered list it is arguably under-built rather than merely tight.

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 no output schema, the description usefully says what a result carries, and the annotations cover the safety profile. However, a six-parameter tool with a Fatture in Cloud filter expression and pagination deserves at least a note on filter syntax and paging, which is absent.

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 coverage is 67% and the q, sort, fieldset and company_id parameters are self-documented in the schema. The description adds no meaning to any of them — notably it never connects 'destinatari e stato di consegna' to filterable or sortable fields, and page/per_page are undocumented in both places. Baseline 3 fits.

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 names a specific resource and scope: the history of emails sent from Fatture in Cloud, and it previews the payload (recipients and delivery status). That is enough to distinguish it from the sibling send-side tools (email_document, bulk_email) at a glance, though it does not explicitly name any sibling.

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?

It states no when-to-use condition, no exclusions and no alternative. There is no direct sibling for reading sent-email history, but the agent is given no cue about when to reach for this versus email_document or bulk_email, and nothing about paging or filtering through history.

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