m365_search_emails

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

With no annotations provided, the description must convey behavioral traits. It fails to mention authentication needs, side effects, rate limits, or what happens when no search criteria are given. The empty schema and vague description hide critical behavior.

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, which is concise but lacks necessary detail. It is front-loaded with the verb but omits essential context about how to provide search criteria.

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 complexity of searching emails and the presence of many sibling tools, the description is woefully incomplete. It does not explain the output, how to input search terms, or how it differs from similar tools like 'list_emails' or 'm365_list_emails'.

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 description mentions filtering by keyword, sender, or subject, but the input schema has no parameters. This is misleading and provides no value beyond the schema – in fact, it contradicts the 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 states the tool searches emails by keyword, sender, or subject. However, the input schema has no parameters to specify these criteria, creating confusion about how to use the tool. The purpose is stated but inconsistent with the schema.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'm365_list_emails', 'search_emails', or 'list_emails'. The description lacks any context about prerequisites or when to choose this tool.

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