List Gmail drafts

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true. Description adds that the tool returns basic metadata (subject, recipient, snippet), giving the agent a clear idea of the output shape. No mention of pagination behavior or rate limits, but the annotation reduces the burden for safety disclosure.

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?

Single sentence with no unnecessary words. Front-loaded with the main action and scope, every word contributes value.

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 absence of an output schema and the need to explain return values, the description is too brief. It only mentions 'basic metadata' without specifying the full structure. Pagination via pageToken and maxResults is not addressed, nor is the relationship to get_draft for full content. The simplicity of the tool partially offsets this, but more detail is warranted.

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 low (33%): only the account parameter has a description. The description does not compensate by explaining pageToken or maxResults, leaving the agent to infer their purpose. For a tool with 3 parameters, this is insufficient.

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?

Clearly states the tool lists existing drafts for a Gmail account and specifies the metadata returned (subject, recipient, snippet). Distinguishes from siblings like create_draft and send_email by limiting to read-only listing of drafts.

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?

Does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives. The sibling list includes many tools, but no guidance on choosing list_drafts over search_threads or get_message for draft retrieval. Some parameter-level guidance is given for the account field, but overall usage context is lacking.

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