get_message_attachments

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

No annotations provided; description only states listing operation with no mention of side effects, authentication requirements (account, password), or constraints. Does not disclose that it's read-only.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with purpose. Concise but lacks necessary detail about parameters and output format.

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?

No output schema; description lists fields returned but not format (e.g., array). Three parameters with no explanations, especially sensitive ones like password. Incomplete for effective agent use.

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 description coverage is 0%; description adds no explanation for parameters (message_id, account, password). Does not clarify that message_id is required or how to obtain it, nor the purpose of account and password.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'list', resource 'a message's attachments', and includes specific fields returned (filename, mimeType, size, attachmentId). Distinguishes from siblings like download_attachment.

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?

Implies use when needing attachment metadata, but no explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives (e.g., download_attachment) or prerequisites like having the message_id.

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