List Drafts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. 'List' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not mention what is returned (e.g., summaries vs. full emails), pagination, or any side effects. It is adequate for a simple list operation but lacks richer detail.

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?

A single sentence that states the core behavior with no filler. The essential information is front-loaded and every word earns its place.

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 simple list tool with two optional parameters fully documented in the schema and no output schema, the description is sufficient to understand what the tool does. It lacks explicit usage guidance, but that gap is covered by the purpose clarity and schema; no critical operational detail is missing.

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 100%, with both 'limit' and 'folder' already documented in the input schema. The description adds no additional meaning about the parameters, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 the specific resource ('draft emails in the Drafts folder'). This is immediately distinct from sibling tools like list_unread (which lists unread messages) and search_emails (which searches broadly), so an agent can identify it without opening the schema.

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 choose this tool over alternatives such as search_emails or list_unread, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. An agent is left to infer usage from the tool name and brief phrase.

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