get_email_attachments

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavior. It only says 'list all attachments', omitting critical details like whether it returns metadata, download links, or requires specific permissions. There is no mention of the operation being read-only or any side effects.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the essential action without waste. Every word earns its place, making it highly efficient for an agent to parse.

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 listing tool with no output schema, the description should at least hint at the nature of the returned data (e.g., filenames, sizes, IDs). It fails to do so, leaving the agent unaware of what 'attachments' means in the response. The tool's simplicity does not excuse the missing output context.

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 coverage is 100%, and the single parameter 'emailId' already has a description ('Email message ID'). The tool description adds no extra semantic meaning beyond stating the parameter's role, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 action (list) and resource (attachments) with a specific context (for a specific email). It effectively distinguishes the tool from siblings like 'get_email_details' (which likely returns email body) and 'download_attachment' (which retrieves a specific file).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'download_attachment' or 'get_email_details'. It does not specify prerequisites, typical workflows, or scenarios where the tool is inappropriate.

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