mail_search

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, which aligns with the search nature. The description adds value by specifying the use of Gmail search syntax and listing returned fields. It does not mention pagination or rate limits, but the limit parameter covers result count. No contradictions with annotations.

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 concise with three sentences, each serving a purpose: stating the function, explaining syntax, and describing the return value. No unnecessary text, and the key information is front-loaded.

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?

The description covers the search syntax, return format, and limit parameter. It mentions it searches Hermes's Gmail, providing context. However, it could mention ordering or that results are from a single mailbox. Overall, it is fairly complete for a search tool with an output schema.

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 schema has 50% description coverage; the query parameter lacks a description. The description compensates by providing examples of Gmail search operators (from:, subject:, after:), adding significant semantic meaning beyond the input 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 the tool searches emails in Hermes's Gmail using Gmail search syntax, specifying a verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like mail_get (single email retrieval) and mail_list_pending (listing pending emails) by focusing on search with complex queries.

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 search tasks but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives. No guidance on when not to use or comparison with mail_list_pending or other list tools is provided, leaving it to the agent to infer.

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