mail_listActionLogsV1

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses read-only behavior, pagination, and sorting, but lacks details on authorization, rate limits, or side effects. It adequately covers basic behavioral traits but could be more comprehensive.

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?

Two sentences: first front-loads purpose and resource, second adds filtering and sorting. No filler words, efficient and clear.

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 or annotations, the description covers purpose, filtering, and pagination. However, it omits details on the return format or field composition, which could help an agent understand the result structure.

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 100% (baseline 3). The description adds value by summarizing filtering capabilities and stating result sorting (not in schema). This enhances semantic understanding beyond individual parameter descriptions.

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 verb 'Retrieve' and the resource 'account action logs for the given mail order', distinguishing it from other mail log tools (e.g., access, inbound, mailbox action). It also specifies sorting by timestamp descending.

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 implies usage for fetching account action logs of a mail order but does not explicitly compare to sibling tools like mail_listMailboxActionLogsV1 or provide when-not-to-use guidance. The filtering options are stated but not in a decision-making context.

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