Listar bandeja de entrada

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds the behavioral details of returning messages from newest to oldest and focusing on the most recent, but it does not disclose potential return format, pagination behavior, or what happens when more messages exist than the limit. This is similar to the high-calibration example.

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 that immediately conveys the core action and scope. No redundant information, and it is front-loaded with the verb and resource.

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 list tool with two optional, well-documented parameters and read-only annotations, the description is largely adequate. It clearly communicates the purpose and ordering, though it lacks explicit mention of pagination or return fields. Given the absence of an output schema, a bit more detail could improve completeness, but it is not severely deficient.

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% for both parameters (limit and unreadOnly), so the schema fully documents them. The description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, hence the baseline score of 3.

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 the most recent inbox messages, newest to oldest. The verb 'Lista' and resource 'bandeja de entrada' are specific, and the scope (recent, ordered) distinguishes it from sibling tools like ews_search_inbox or ews_get_message.

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 implies usage for retrieving recent inbox messages, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., for searching, use ews_search_inbox). It provides no exclusions or alternative guidance beyond the inherent implication.

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