Search My Mail

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the permission requirement ('Requires delegated Mail.Read') and the scope ('signed-in user mailbox'), which is useful. However, it does not disclose behavioral details like sorting, pagination, or folder scope beyond what the schema already provides.

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 primary sentences and a Chinese intent expansion. The main purpose is front-loaded and there is no fluff. The Chinese intents add some length but serve a multilingual intent-matching purpose, so it's not zero waste.

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?

For a simple search tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, permission, and query examples. It could explicitly state that it returns a list of messages, but this is implied by the name and the top parameter. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for its complexity.

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%, and the description does not add any parameter semantics beyond what the schema already explains. The 'by keyword' phrase mirrors the query parameter description, so there is no additional value.

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 specific verb ('Search'), resource ('messages in the signed-in user mailbox'), and method ('by keyword'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like mail_list_messages (which lists all messages) and mail_get_message (which retrieves a single message).

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 implies usage when a user wants to search for emails by keyword, and it notes the permission requirement. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, such as preferring search_mail for broader searches or mail_list_messages for listing without a keyword.

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