list_mail_folders

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description does not contradict them. The description adds the specific folder options, but does not disclose behavior around pagination, recursion, or authentication requirements, which is not covered by annotations.

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 12-word sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and resource. It is concise, direct, and contains no filler words.

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 tool has 6 parameters and an output schema, but the description only covers a fraction of the functionality. It omits the purpose of most parameters, does not describe the output shape (though the output schema exists), and offers no context about recursion or starting points, making it incomplete for correct invocation.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate for parameter meanings. It only hints at the 'folder' parameter by naming Inbox, Sent, Drafts, while leaving storeId, maxDepth, recursive, maxResults, and parentFolderId entirely unexplained.

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 a clear action ('List') and resource ('Inbox, Sent, Drafts, or a selected Outlook Web folder tree'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools that handle emails or calendar events. The only vagueness is 'selected' – it's unclear whether that means a specific named folder or a folder tree root.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_emails or get_email. It implies usage for folder enumeration, but does not mention exclusions or mention other tools.

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