search_emails

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool returns UID, sender, subject, date, and a Gmail web URL. It explains how multiple queries behave (sectioned output, per-query limits). It does not mention rate limits or potential side effects, but for a search tool this is acceptable.

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 clear and well-structured, with a first sentence summarizing the tool's purpose, followed by usage modes and output details. The Args section is somewhat redundant with the schema but still helpful. Could be slightly more concise.

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 the presence of an output schema (not shown but indicated), the description covers return fields adequately. It explains query syntax and output format. It lacks details on sorting or pagination beyond max_results, but for a search tool with two parameters it is adequately complete.

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 0%, so the description must fully explain parameters. It does so clearly: queries can be a string or array, max_results is an integer default 10 applied per query. This adds significant meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 it searches Gmail using full Gmail search syntax, with a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('Gmail'). It distinguishes from sibling tools (read_email, send_email) as a search tool.

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 explains when to use a single query versus a list of queries, and mentions that max_results applies per query. It does not explicitly state when not to use it (e.g., for reading a specific email), but the sibling context implies alternatives.

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