search_emails

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

The description adds context about the pure filter capability and supported filter fields. Annotations already indicate readOnly and non-destructive behavior, so no contradiction. No additional behavioral traits like rate limits or return format are disclosed.

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?

Two sentences that are front-loaded with the primary action and include a concrete example. Every sentence adds value with no waste.

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?

The description explains the search mechanism and filter usage well. While it does not cover pagination or response format, the input schema handles those details. Overall adequate for a search tool with good annotations.

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 baseline is 3. The description repeats some parameter info (e.g., omit query for filters) and gives an example, but adds limited new meaning beyond the schema descriptions.

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 searches emails by keyword across subject, sender, and body. It includes an example of using it as a pure filter, which helps distinguish from a basic list tool like list_emails, though it does not explicitly name siblings.

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 guidance on when to use the tool (for keyword search or filter-only queries) and provides an example. However, it does not mention when to use alternatives or when not to use this tool.

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