skylight_list_recent_invited_emails

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true), but the description adds no behavioral context: it never defines what 'recently' means (time window, count cap), whether results are paginated, or what scope the list covers. For a read tool whose annotations are light, this is a real gap.

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?

One short sentence with the purpose front-loaded and the usage hint in a parenthetical that earns its space. No filler or redundancy.

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 simple one-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description covers the essentials of what it returns (email addresses) and one good application. It still omits the frameId semantics and the meaning of the 'recent' window, which an agent would need to call it confidently.

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 0% for the single parameter frameId, so the schema explains nothing about it. The description doesn't mention frameId at all, leaving the agent to guess whether it is a scope filter or whether results are global when omitted.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('List recently-invited email addresses') that no sibling duplicates, so an agent can identify it. However it doesn't explicitly contrast itself with related member/user tools like skylight_invite_user or skylight_list_frame_members, leaving some differentiation to inference.

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 parenthetical gives a concrete use case — 'handy for filling create_event invited_emails' — which effectively tells the agent when to reach for this tool. It stops short of naming exclusions or alternative sources for invite data, but the trigger condition is clear.

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