teamleader_emails_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only operation via 'List' and scopes results to 'tracked emails', but it does not disclose any potential limitations, pagination behavior, or error conditions. For a simple read tool, this is adequate but not rich.

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 two succinct sentences. It front-loads the primary action and immediately states the critical requirement, with no wasted words. This is concise and well-structured.

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 tool's simplicity and the presence of a well-documented schema, the description provides enough context for correct invocation. However, no output schema is present, and the description does not hint at the return format, which might be expected for a list tool. Still, for a basic filtered list, it is largely 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 description coverage is 100%, with both parameters having descriptive comments. The description adds minimal semantic value by stating the filter purpose ('to filter by linked entity'), which is largely redundant with the schema. It does not provide additional syntax or behavioral details beyond 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?

The description clearly states the tool lists tracked emails from Teamleader Focus, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling list tools by focusing on emails, and mentions the required filter for linked entities.

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 clearly conveys that both subject_type and subject_id are required, which is essential usage context. It does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives, but the scope is clear enough for the user to understand it is for listing emails only.

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