get_recent_emails

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

No annotations are provided, so the description discloses sorting order and parameter defaults. However, it does not mention error handling (e.g., if mailbox doesn't exist) or rate limits. For a read operation, this is fairly transparent but could add more safety details.

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 very concise: one sentence for the main purpose, then a bulleted parameter list. No redundant information. Every sentence is necessary and front-loaded.

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?

Given the output schema exists, the description does not need to explain return values. It covers purpose, sorting, and parameter constraints. For a simple retrieval tool, it is sufficient but could mention potential failure modes or that results are paginated.

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 description adds meaning beyond the input schema by explaining mailbox as 'Mailbox name or role (e.g. 'inbox', 'sent', 'drafts', 'trash', or a custom name)' and limit as 'Max results (1–50, default 25).' This provides concrete constraints and examples, enriching the bare type definitions.

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 'Get the most recent emails in a mailbox (sorted by date, newest first).' It specifies the verb (get), resource (recent emails), and scope (mailbox). This distinguishes it from siblings like query_emails or get_emails which have different filters.

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 fetching recent emails but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs. alternatives like get_emails or query_emails. No exclusions or alternative conditions are given, which is a gap given many sibling tools.

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