get_email_activity

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

Discloses read-only nature ('Read-only, safe to retry'), authentication method ('Authenticated via API key'), concurrency limit ('Max 10 concurrent requests'), and output format. No annotations provided, so description carries full burden and meets it comprehensively.

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?

Very efficient: one sentence for purpose, one for usage guidance, two for behavioral notes, then clean parameter list. No wasted words.

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?

Covers all essential aspects: purpose, input parameters with constraints, output format, authentication, rate limits, read-only safety, and pagination. An output schema exists but description still summarizes return structure, aiding quick comprehension.

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%, but description thoroughly explains each parameter: campaign_id (must be sent campaign with example), count (range 1-1000, default 20), offset (pagination). This adds significant value beyond the schema's property names and types.

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 starts with a clear verb and resource: 'Retrieve per-recipient activity timeline for a sent campaign (opens, clicks, bounces).' It specifies the exact data returned and differentiates from sibling tools by listing alternative tools for specific use cases.

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?

Explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives: 'Use get_open_details for open data only. Use get_campaign_report for aggregate totals. Use get_campaign_recipients for delivery status only.' Also mentions authentication and rate limits.

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