gmail_search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the search uses Gmail search syntax and targets the inbox, but omits details like rate limits, authentication needs, or whether results are sorted. The description is not misleading but is minimal.

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 concise with two sentences that front-load the core purpose. Every sentence adds value; no fluff. This is an excellent example of brevity.

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 output schema, the description should hint at return format or pagination. It mentions maxResults parameter but not how results are structured or ordered. It is adequate for a simple tool but could be more complete.

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?

Both parameters have descriptions in the input schema (100% coverage). The description adds 'Gmail search syntax' context but does not elaborate on parameter values, defaults, or examples. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema covers the essentials.

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 tool searches emails in Gmail inbox using Gmail search syntax, and is used to find specific emails. It distinguishes from siblings (gmail_list, gmail_read) by focusing on search with syntax, though it could be more explicit.

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 a basic usage hint ('Use this to find specific emails'), but does not provide context on when not to use it, alternatives, or prerequisites. Compared to sibling tools, more explicit guidance would help.

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