list_attachments

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

The description does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond the basic functionality. With no annotations provided, it should mention if the operation is read-only, requires authentication, or has limitations. The current description is minimal and does not add behavioral context.

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 extremely concise: one sentence for purpose and one sentence for parameter explanation. It is front-loaded and every sentence serves a purpose, with no wasted words.

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 that an output schema exists (context signals indicate true), the description does not need to explain return values. The parameter documentation is clear. However, it could briefly mention that the output is a list of attachment metadata, but the output schema covers that. Overall, complete for the tool's 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?

The description adds meaning to the message_id parameter beyond the schema, indicating it is the email ID from list_emails or search_emails. With 0% schema description coverage, this is valuable context that helps the agent understand how to obtain the required 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 clearly states the tool lists all attachments of an email, using the verb 'liệt kê' (list) and specific resource 'file đính kèm' (attachments). It distinguishes from siblings like read_attachment (which likely reads content) and list_emails (which lists emails).

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 specifies that the message_id is obtained from list_emails or search_emails, providing clear context for parameter usage. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like read_attachment, so it lacks explicit when-not guidance.

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