List emails

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered externally. The description usefully discloses the sort order (newest first), but says nothing about pagination, whether truncation occurs at the limit, or which accounts/servers are aggregated when 'server' 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 short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with the ordering qualifier placed at the end. Nothing is redundant or padded.

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 simple read-only list tool with no output schema, the essentials are present and annotations cover safety. Missing pieces an agent would want — the default result size, pagination behaviour, and how omitted 'server' resolves — leave it adequate rather than complete.

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%: 'folder' and 'server' carry descriptions while 'limit' has only numeric constraints (default 25, max 200). The description adds the ordering semantics that give 'limit' meaning, but does not explain the limit default or what happens when it is exceeded, so it only marginally improves on the schema.

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 a specific verb (list), resource (emails), scope (in a folder) and ordering (newest first), which is more than a tautology. It does not, however, differentiate itself from close siblings such as email_filter_list or email_search, so an agent must infer the boundary from names alone.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives. Given siblings named email_search, email_filter_list and email_read, the description never says when this plain listing is the right choice versus a search or filtered list.

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