list_emails

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden, yet it says nothing about this being a read-only paginated listing, what the default ordering is, or whether results are capped. It also does not explain what pagination metadata comes back, which matters for a list tool with page/per_page inputs.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though the brevity means the one clause has to carry more weight than it does.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description is the only place an agent could learn about ordering, limits, and return shape, and it covers none of them. All five parameters are optional, so an agent could reasonably call with no arguments and would not know what to expect back.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description names the status and date filters but adds no semantics beyond the schema (no note on whether from_date/to_date are inclusive, or on status value behavior) and omits pagination parameters entirely.

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?

"List sent emails" gives a specific verb and a scoped resource, and the word "sent" implicitly separates it from list_inbound_emails and search_mailbox. It stops short of explicitly naming the distinction, so it is clear rather than sibling-differentiating.

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 phrase "optional status and date filters" hints at the retrieval use case, but there is no statement of when to prefer this over search_mailbox, list_inbound_emails, or get_email. Usage is only implied by the resource scope.

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