hey_list_screener

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds behavioral context: it returns cached results by default and allows cache bypass with force_refresh. This adds value beyond the annotations, disclosing a key behavior.

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: the first states purpose, the second adds caching details. No unnecessary words, and the key information is front-loaded.

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 list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers all relevant behavior: what is listed (Screener emails) and the caching policy. It is fully informative given the tool's simplicity.

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 100% for the single parameter. The description adds meaning by explaining the default caching behavior and how force_refresh alters it, complementing the schema description of the parameter.

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 it lists emails waiting in the Screener, using the verb 'List' and a specific resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'hey_list_emails' which lists all emails, or 'hey_list_label_emails' which lists by label.

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 description mentions caching behavior and the force_refresh parameter, giving a clue about when to refresh. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it compare to similar list tools.

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