list_suppressions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses what qualifies as a suppressed address (bounces, complaints, manual entries), but says nothing about pagination behavior, ordering, or that results are read-only and non-mutating.

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 efficient sentence with the core resource front-loaded and the parenthetical detail earning its place. It is terse rather than padded, though it leaves little room for the missing usage and pagination context.

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?

For a simple, parameter-light list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essentials of what is listed. It falls short on return shape, pagination, and when to prefer it over related suppression tools.

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 description coverage is 100% for both optional parameters (page, per_page), so the schema already documents them. The description adds no pagination details beyond the schema, which is the baseline expectation.

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 gives a specific verb ('List') and resource ('suppressed addresses') and enumerates the suppression categories (bounces, complaints, manual entries), so an agent understands exactly what is returned. It does not explicitly contrast itself with add_suppression or remove_suppression, but the read-only listing purpose is unambiguous.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites, and no routing to alternatives such as add_suppression for adding entries. Usage is only inferable from the verb 'List'.

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