List emails in a folder

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint), the description reveals important behaviors: INBOX excludes muted senders, suspicious flag indicates authentication failure, and pagination limit. No contradiction with annotations.

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 concise yet comprehensive, packing multiple usage scenarios and behavioral notes into a few sentences without redundancy. Each sentence adds value.

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?

Considering no output schema, the description adequately covers return item flags (muted, suspicious) and pagination. All parameters are well explained, and usage context is fully covered. The tool's purpose and behavior are completely documented.

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%, so the description adds value beyond schema: explains mailboxId omission for unified view, folder default and mute behavior, and offset/limit defaults. This enriches parameter understanding.

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 tool lists emails in a folder (default INBOX). It provides specific usage contexts like 'what's in my inbox?' and distinguishes itself from sibling tools that list other resources.

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 gives explicit when-to-use examples and explains how to scope by mailbox. It also advises using folder=MUTED for muted senders. However, it lacks explicit 'when not to use' or alternatives among siblings.

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