list_sieve_scripts

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure, but it lacks details about what the list returns (e.g., all scripts, filtering, pagination, or format). It adds minimal behavioral context beyond the verb 'list'.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the purpose, and contains no unnecessary words. Every sentence 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?

Given no parameters and an existing output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose and usage condition. It is complete enough for a simple list operation, though it could hint at the output structure.

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?

There are no parameters, so the description does not need to explain them. Baseline is 4 for zero-parameter tools, and the description adds no semantic information about parameters.

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 'List Sieve filter scripts' with a brief explanation of what they are (server-side mail routing rules). This effectively distinguishes it from sibling sieve tools like create, get, update, destroy, and validate.

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 explicitly provides a prerequisite (requires sieve capability in JMAP session) and offers an alternative path via the Fastmail web UI if the capability is missing. This helps the agent decide when to use the tool and when to defer.

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