mail_listOutboundLogsV1

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden. It discloses pagination, filtering options, and descending sort order. It does not explicitly state it is read-only, but that is implied. Missing rate limits or authentication notes, but acceptable for a simple query tool.

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: the first states the core action and scope, the second lists filtering and sorting. No wasted words, front-loaded, and easy to parse.

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 full schema coverage and no output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's behavior (pagination, filtering, sorting). It is complete enough for an agent to understand what to expect and how to use it.

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%, so each parameter has a description. The description's mention of filtering by account, date range, etc., merely summarizes the schema without adding new detail. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb ('Retrieve'), identifies the resource as 'outbound (sent mail) delivery logs', and scopes it to 'the domain attached to the given mail order'. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like 'mail_listInboundLogsV1' (inbound logs) and other log 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 implies use when outbound log data is needed and mentions filtering capabilities, but lacks explicit exclusions or references to alternative tools (e.g., 'for inbound logs, use mail_listInboundLogsV1'). Still, the purpose is clear enough for an agent to select appropriately.

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