list_automation_emails

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only states a basic list operation. It does not mention return value format, pagination, required permissions, whether it returns all emails or just metadata, or any side effects. The description adds minimal value beyond what the name implies.

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 concise sentence with no filler words. It front-loads the action and object, and every word earns its place. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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?

Despite having only one parameter and no output schema, the description is too thin to be complete. It does not clarify what 'emails' means in the response, whether it includes details like subject or status, or any filtering/ordering behavior. For a list operation, the agent would benefit from knowing the return shape or any limitations, but this is entirely 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?

The input schema already fully documents workflow_id with a clear description ('The automation workflow ID'), and schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional meaning to the parameter, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 the action ('List') and the resource ('emails') with a scope ('in an automation workflow'), which distinguishes it from 'get_automation_email' (singular) and 'list_automations' (workflows, not emails). However, it does not explicitly mention that it lists emails for the given workflow_id, nor does it contrast with sibling tools.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_automation_email or list_automations. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusion criteria, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the tool name.

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