list_bounces

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it only says 'List bounced messages, filtered and paginated.' It does not disclose pagination defaults, ordering, return format, or behavior when no bounces exist. This is minimal transparency beyond the surface action.

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 superfluous words. It fronts the primary purpose immediately and is appropriate for a simple list operation.

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 tool with 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too thin. It omits expected return shape, pagination behavior, and any edge-case handling, which the agent would need to infer or test. The schema provides parameter details but not operational context.

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 covers all five parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the description need not repeat them. The phrase 'filtered and paginated' only generically alludes to tag/query/status and page/per_page, adding no specific meaning 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 verb 'List' and the resource 'bounced messages', with additional qualifiers 'filtered and paginated'. It is distinct from sibling tools like list_emails because it specifically targets bounces, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with them.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_emails. The description only states capabilities (filtered and paginated) but does not indicate scenarios or exclude cases, leaving the agent without clear selection criteria.

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