List scheduled emails

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

Annotations only contain a title, so the description must carry behavioral weight. It discloses that both healthy and damaged records are returned, a non-obvious trait. However, it does not confirm read-only safety or describe helper behavior around the 'damaged' category.

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?

A single sentence with no filler, front-loaded with the verb and resource. Every word contributes to the intended scope.

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 a simple two-parameter schema, but no output schema and no behavioral annotations. The description lacks definitions for 'damaged' and does not mention pagination or return format, which an agent might need for correct invocation.

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 input schema already documents both parameters well, including the state enum and limit bounds. The description's 'by lifecycle state' only restates the state filter, adding no new parameter meaning.

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 'List' and the resource 'scheduled-mail records', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_mailboxes. The phrase 'healthy and damaged' adds a useful classification but is not fully defined, slightly reducing clarity.

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?

No explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives are mentioned. The context implies this is the tool for listing scheduled emails, but no exclusions or comparative guidance is provided.

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