list_emails

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

The description clearly indicates a read-only list operation, but with no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It does not mention pagination behavior, ordering, or what fields are returned, leaving some behavioral details undisclosed.

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 just two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and contains zero filler. Every word adds value.

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 tool is simple, and the description covers the core purpose and filter option. However, there is no output schema, so the description could have elaborated on the return value shape or pagination to compensate, leaving a minor gap.

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 schema covers 100% of the parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description's mention of filtering by status adds no new meaning beyond the schema's enum and description.

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 specific verb 'List' and clearly identifies the resource as 'emails from your Buttondown newsletter'. It also mentions filtering by status, which distinguishes this from sibling tools like get_email (which fetches a single email).

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 listing and filtering emails, but it does not explicitly contrast with siblings like get_email or mention when not to use it. There is no 'use X instead' guidance, so the context is implied rather than explicit.

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