get-sandbox-messages

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states it 'gets list of messages' but doesn't describe what kind of messages (email content, metadata), whether this is a read-only operation, if there are rate limits, authentication requirements, or what happens with empty results. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the basic action.

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, efficient sentence that states exactly what the tool does without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource. Every word earns its place - there's no redundancy or fluff.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain what the returned message list contains (structure, fields), how pagination works in practice, or any error conditions. For a tool that retrieves data with multiple parameters, more context about the return format and usage patterns would be helpful.

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%, so all parameters are documented in the schema. The description doesn't add any parameter semantics beyond what's already in the schema - it doesn't explain how pagination works with both 'page' and 'last_id', or provide examples of search queries. With complete schema coverage, the baseline of 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 clearly states the verb 'Get' and resource 'list of messages from the sandbox test inbox', making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like 'send-sandbox-email' and 'show-sandbox-email-message' by focusing on listing rather than sending or showing individual messages. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other list operations like 'list-templates' beyond the resource name.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention when to use 'get-sandbox-messages' instead of 'show-sandbox-email-message' for viewing messages, or how it relates to 'send-sandbox-email'. There's no context about prerequisites, typical use cases, or exclusions.

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