list_emails

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses important behavioral traits including the sort field warning ('do NOT use created or edited'), automatic resolution of user names, and the contact ID not being a person's name. It also specifies pagination defaults and the maximum take value.

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 front-loaded with a concise one-liner and usage guideline, followed by a well-organized parameter list. Each parameter explanation earns its place with practical details and no unnecessary fluff.

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?

With an output schema present, return values are covered. The description covers all parameters, provides usage context versus alternatives, and includes warnings about sort fields and ID formats, making it comprehensively self-sufficient.

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%, but the description compensates fully by explaining every parameter with examples, formats, constraints, and warnings. For instance, it clarifies that 'contact' is an internal ID and 'user' can be either display or login name, adding meaning far beyond the basic string type.

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 'List email activities with email-specific fields' with a specific verb and resource. It explicitly distinguishes from list_activities by recommending this tool when email details are needed, making it distinct among sibling tools.

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 an explicit alternative: 'Use this instead of list_activities(type='EMAIL') when you need email details.' It also gives practical parameter guidance, such as using list_queues to find queue names and list_contacts to find contact IDs.

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