outlook_list_inbox_overrides

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 explains that overrides force mail into Focused or Other, but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, permission requirements, or pagination behavior. The description is 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the main action, second sentence adds essential context. No unnecessary words, every sentence earns its place.

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 explains what is listed (override rules) and their function. However, it lacks details on the structure of the returned list, such as fields included or pagination. Still, it is fairly complete for a simple list operation.

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?

There are no parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds meaning by explaining the purpose of the override rules and what the tool returns, which is the baseline expectation for a zero-parameter tool.

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 lists the user's Focused Inbox per-sender override rules. It also explains what an override does, distinguishing it from sibling tools like set or delete overrides.

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 (to view overrides) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like outlook_set_inbox_override or outlook_delete_inbox_override. No exclusions are provided.

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