Retrieve all configured email accounts and identify the default one. Use it to check available accounts before searching, reading, or sending messages.
Lista as contas de e-mail configuradas e qual é a padrão.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It's a read-only operation by nature, but the description doesn't confirm safety, return format, or side effects. It does add the useful detail that the default account is included, going slightly beyond the name.
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?
A single, concise sentence that front-loads the main purpose and includes the key detail about the default account. No wasted words.
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 the simplicity of the tool (no parameters, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate. It could have been improved by explicitly noting it's a read-only operation or how it relates to sibling tools, but it covers the basics.
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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description appropriately adds no parameter details since none are needed.
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 lists configured email accounts and identifies the default one. The verb and resource are specific, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like account_info or search_all_accounts.
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?
Usage is implied by the description—one would use this to see available accounts. However, it doesn't state when to use this versus account_info or search_all_accounts, leaving some ambiguity.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.