List emails

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavior on its own. It does state the operation is a listing (read-only by implication), scoped to the inbox, sorted newest first, and supports an optional query. However, it does not mention pagination, return format, or any requirements, leaving significant gaps for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with verb and resource, includes ordering and optional query. No wasted words; the title 'List emails' is expanded with useful scope and behavior.

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?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations, and the description does not describe return values or pagination behavior. It is adequate for a simple list call but leaves an agent uncertain about what the response contains. Given low complexity and full schema coverage, a 3 is appropriate.

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% with each parameter documented (query, account, maxResults). The description adds context about the inbox and sorting but does not add parameter-specific semantics beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 ('List'), a resource ('messages from the inbox'), and behavior ('newest first', optional Gmail search query'). This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like google_gmail_list_attachments, google_gmail_drafts_list, and google_gmail_get.

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 context that this is for inbox messages and supports a search query, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer it over alternatives or mention exclusions (e.g., drafts, attachments). Usage is implied rather than stated.

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