list_email_logs

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and only partially meets it: "List" implies a read, but read-only safety, account/domain scoping (there is no domain parameter, so scope is unclear), sort order, and how far back "recent" reaches are all unstated. Retention window and result ordering matter here because the tool is designed to be called immediately after a send.

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, purpose first, usage second, with no redundant restatement of the name or schema. Every clause carries information.

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 3-optional-parameter read tool with a fully described schema, the description is nearly sufficient, but with no output schema it should say what a log entry returns (per-recipient event status, timestamps) and what scope of logs is covered. An agent calling it correctly still has to guess at result shape and time window.

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 defaults, bounds, and an enum fully documented, so the baseline is 3. The description adds nothing about pagination behavior or how eventType interacts with paging, so no credit above baseline.

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?

"List recent Notify email delivery logs" gives a specific verb plus resource, which separates it cleanly from the sibling write/send tools and from list_domains/list_webhooks/list_api_keys. It stops short of explicitly contrasting with any named sibling, but the resource is unambiguous.

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?

"Use after a send to check delivery, bounce, open, or click status" supplies a concrete trigger condition that an agent can act on. There are no exclusions or named alternatives, and it doesn't say whether this covers test sends or historical backfill, so it falls short of a 5.

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