get_recent_from_sender

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It describes the parameters and return, but does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, partial match behavior, pagination, or any side effects. It provides basic transparency but lacks depth.

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 well-structured with an Args section and bullet points. It is front-loaded with a clear purpose sentence. However, it includes an irrelevant 'User Preferences' section and is somewhat lengthy, though every sentence serves a purpose.

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 7 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema that exists, the description covers all necessary parameter details and the return value. It is complete enough for an agent to invoke the tool correctly, though minor extras like user preferences could be removed.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, and the description compensates fully by explaining each parameter's meaning, default values, and acceptable values (e.g., time_range options). This is excellent and adds significant value beyond the schema.

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 it fetches recent emails from a specific sender with human-friendly time filters, which is specific and informative. However, it does not differentiate itself from similar sibling tools like 'search_by_sender' or 'get_recent_emails', leaving ambiguity about when to use this tool over others.

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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies usage for recent emails from a sender with time filters, but does not state prerequisites or exclusions, nor does it mention any relationship to sibling tools.

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