imap_get_latest_emails

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

Description discloses that the tool returns lightweight headers (uid, from, subject, date) and suggests using imap_get_email for full content. There are no annotations to contradict. Some behavioral details (e.g., no side effects) are implicit but clear enough for a read operation.

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 purpose and ordering, followed by usage guidance and alternatives. Every sentence adds value; no redundant or unnecessary text.

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?

No output schema, so description explains return values (lightweight headers). It covers tool purpose, context, and relationship to siblings. Missing error handling or folder existence details, but sufficient for typical usage.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no new parameter information beyond what the schema already provides. It repeats the account options but does not enhance understanding.

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 specifies the verb 'Get', resource 'most recent emails', and ordering 'newest first'. It distinguishes from siblings by pointing to imap_get_email for full emails and imap_search_emails for filtered searches.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (for 'what just came in?' when no search filter is needed) and when not (filtering should use imap_search_emails). Provides clear alternatives.

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