get_recent_emails

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

No annotations are present, and the description fails to disclose any behavioral traits such as read-only nature, authentication requirements, rate limits, or that it likely returns emails from the primary inbox. The tool is a read operation but this is not explicit.

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 short sentence, which is concise and front-loaded. It avoids unnecessary words, but could benefit from slightly more detail (e.g., scope) without becoming verbose.

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 simplicity of the tool (one optional parameter, no output schema) and the presence of many email-related siblings, the description lacks critical context such as what defines 'recent', which mailbox folder is targeted, and how the result set is ordered. This makes it insufficient for an AI agent to reliably select and invoke the tool.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with a description for the 'count' parameter. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, 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 'Get recent emails from Office 365' clearly indicates a read operation on emails, but 'recent' is vague. It does not specify the timeframe or mailbox scope (e.g., inbox only), nor does it distinguish from sibling tools like get_folder_emails or search_emails.

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?

No usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool over alternatives such as get_folder_emails (for specific folders) or search_emails (for filtering).

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