postmark_search_messages

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It fails to disclose behavioral traits such as rate limits, pagination behavior, authentication requirements (api_key not mentioned in description though in schema), or response format. The description only states the basic search capability.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose. It contains no unnecessary words or information.

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?

Despite the simplicity of parameters, the description omits important context: it does not specify that the tool returns a list of messages, the default pagination (count=25), or that api_key is required for authentication. This leaves the agent incomplete understanding of how to invoke the tool effectively.

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?

All 7 parameters have descriptive names and schema descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds no new semantics beyond listing filter fields. Score is baseline 3.

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 action 'Search' and the resource 'sent messages in Postmark', along with key filter fields. It differentiates from sibling Postmark tools (e.g., postmark_send_email, postmark_get_template) by specifying the search functionality on sent 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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like postmark_get_delivery_stats or postmark_list_templates. Usage is implied by the action, but no exclusions or context are given.

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