stalwart_list_identities

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It correctly indicates a read operation (list), which is safe. But it does not describe potential side effects, permission requirements, or behavior when account_id is omitted (e.g., defaulting to 'b'), which would be useful context.

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 with no filler words. It states the resource and scope efficiently.

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?

The tool is a simple read-only list with an output schema (which presumably describes the return format). The description covers the purpose and scope adequately. However, the unresolved parameter semantics (account_id) and lack of any behavioral caveats prevent a perfect completeness score.

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 0% – the description never mentions the account_id parameter. While 'of an account' hints at the parameter, it does not explain the default behavior or what values are acceptable. The schema provides only a type and default, leaving semantics unclear. The description fails to compensate.

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 'List sending identities (From addresses) of an account' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing this from sibling list tools (list_accounts, list_domains). The parenthetical '(From addresses)' adds precision about what identities are.

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?

Usage is implied from the tool name and context (listing identities for an account). However, there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over related tools, nor exclusions or alternatives like a search tool.

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