get_messages

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose any behavioral traits such as pagination behavior, rate limits, authentication requirements, or potential performance implications. The cursor parameter hints at pagination but no explanation is given.

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 short sentence, which is front-loaded. However, it lacks detail beyond the basic action. It is not verbose, but does not fully utilize its length to provide valuable information.

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?

Given the presence of sibling tools like get_message_detail and list_emails, and no output schema, the description fails to explain what 'all messages' entails (e.g., limits, filtering), how pagination works, or the shape of the response. The tool is incomplete in context for an AI agent.

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%, with both parameters described in the JSON schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. The baseline is 3 due to high schema coverage.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves all messages from a specified email. The verb 'get' and resource 'messages' are specific. It distinguishes from get_message_detail (single message) and list_emails (emails). However, the term 'messages' could be ambiguous without context.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like get_message_detail or list_emails. No mention of prerequisites or exclusions. The sibling tools list provides context, but the description itself offers no usage direction.

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