List Mail In Folder

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the load. It discloses the permission requirement and the 'recent' qualifier, which is useful. However, it doesn't detail response structure, error behavior, or limitations, so it's adequate but not comprehensive.

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 two sentences plus a localized intent list, with the core purpose front-loaded. Every element earns its place, including the Chinese examples for multilingual clarity.

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 tool's simplicity, the description covers purpose, permission, and folder scope, while the schema covers parameters. Without an output schema, it could hint at return format, but for a list operation this is sufficient.

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% for all three parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, merely referencing 'selected mailbox folder' which corresponds to folderId.

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 uses 'List recent messages in a selected mailbox folder', which clearly specifies the verb (list), resource (messages), and scope (selected mailbox folder). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like mail_list_messages (likely inbox-wide) and mail_search_messages (search-based).

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 clear context (selected folder) and a prerequisite (delegated Mail.Read), indicating when it applies. However, it lacks explicit mention of alternatives or exclusions, so it doesn't fully meet the 'when/when-not' bar.

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