mail_listCatchAllsV1

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It states 'paginated list', indicating paging behavior, and aggregates across mailboxes. However, it does not disclose required permissions, rate limits, or what happens with invalid orderId.

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 14-word sentence with no filler. The verb is front-loaded, and every word is essential. It is optimally concise.

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?

No output schema exists, yet the description does not mention return fields, pagination details, or how to navigate pages. It is adequate for purpose but incomplete for full autonomous usage.

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% with each parameter described. The description adds context for orderId ('across all mailboxes of a mail order'), but does not add significant meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions. Baseline 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 uses the specific verb 'Retrieve' with the resource 'catch-alls' and clarifies the scope ('across all mailboxes of a mail order'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like mail_createCatchAllV1 or mail_listMailboxesV1.

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 listing catch-alls but does not provide explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or mention alternatives. No contrast with other mail list tools is given.

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