email_vacation_list

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only states what the tool lists; it adds no behavioral context such as read-onlyness, output shape, or whether the domain must pre-exist. The verb 'list' implies no mutation, but the description does not explicitly disclose safety or side-effect details.

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 lines with a clear front-loaded purpose; no filler. The 'Args:' section is redundant with the schema but harmless and compact.

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 one-parameter list tool with an output schema, the core inputs and purpose are present. However, absent annotations and any sibling differentiation, an agent cannot tell whether `email_autoresponders_list` is an alternative or whether `domain` must be a fully qualified domain name.

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%, so the description must compensate for the schema's lack of parameter docs. It merely repeats `domain: Domain`, which adds nothing beyond the schema's existing property name and title.

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?

States the resource (vacation/autoresponder) and action (list) with a domain scope. It is understandable in isolation, but it does not differentiate from sibling `email_autoresponders_list` or clarify whether 'vacation' and 'autoresponder' are the same resource.

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 phrase 'for a domain' gives clear context that this is the domain-scoped list operation, but there is no explicit when-to-use or exclusion, and no mention of when `email_vacation_get` or `email_autoresponders_list` would be more appropriate.

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