search_by_sender

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions partial match, default values, and return format, but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, rate limits, or authentication needs. Adequate but not 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?

Well-structured with clear purpose upfront, followed by parameter descriptions and return info. No extraneous sentences; every word adds value.

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 0% schema coverage and no annotations, the description covers behavior, parameters, and returns. Could mention that the operation is non-destructive (search only), but overall 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 provides meaningful docstrings for all 7 parameters, adding details like partial match, defaults with explanations, and special values (e.g., days_back=0 for all time).

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 (find) and resource (emails) with specific scope (from a specific sender across accounts). It distinguishes from siblings like search_emails or get_recent_from_sender by focusing on sender-based search.

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?

Provides clear context with examples ('tracking newsletters, contacts, or communications from specific people/organizations'), but does not explicitly state when not to use or offer alternatives among siblings.

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