get_email_analytics

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'sampled' which hints at data freshness or accuracy but does not disclose any side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or whether the tool is read-only. With no annotations, the description provides partial transparency but could be more 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?

Three concise sentences with no waste. The first sentence states the action and outputs, the second states usage, and the third provides alternatives. Information is front-loaded and efficiently presented.

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 no output schema, the description lists specific output elements (top senders, busiest hours, volume breakdown by folder). It also points to sibling tools for alternative needs. It could mention whether the sample is real-time or cached, but overall it is reasonably complete for a zero-parameter analytics 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?

No parameters exist (schema is empty), so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameters but adds value by describing the output contents, which is helpful for the agent.

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 tool generates sampled mailbox analytics including specific outputs like top senders, busiest hours, and volume breakdown by folder. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools by naming alternatives.

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 explicit usage context: 'Use for productivity insights and communication pattern analysis.' It then directly tells when to prefer alternatives ('Prefer get_email_stats... Prefer get_volume_trends...'), giving clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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