cm_list_smart_emails

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

The description states 'List' and the annotation 'readOnlyHint: true' already confirms a read operation. The description adds no additional behavioral context such as pagination, result limits, or ordering, which would be useful for an agent invoking this tool.

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 a single sentence with no redundancy. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's function and filters, making it efficient and 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 basic purpose and filter options, but does not mention the output shape (e.g., a list of smart email objects) despite the absence of an output schema. For a simple list tool, this omission lowers completeness.

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% with clear descriptions for both parameters. The description says 'optionally filtered by status and client' but adds no extra meaning, format, or examples beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses the verb 'List' and specifies the resource 'smart transactional emails', making the purpose clear. It mentions optional filters by status and client, which helps differentiate from generic list tools, though it does not explicitly contrast with siblings like 'cm_list_transactional_messages'.

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 indicates optional filters (status and client), providing some usage context. However, it does not specify when to use this tool instead of alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions.

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