List emails

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds a genuinely useful default ('newest first') not present in schema or annotations, but says nothing about pagination behavior, result volume, or what happens when no filters are supplied.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with the verb, scope, default ordering, and filter surface — no filler and nothing buried.

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?

Adequate for a simple read-only list tool with annotations covering safety, but for a six-parameter paginated endpoint with no output schema, an agent gets no sense of what a page contains beyond 'emails' or how many to expect. Some gaps remain around pagination and returned fields.

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 67% and the description restates four of six parameters (status, q, source, days) without adding format or interaction detail. Pagination parameters limit/offset are left entirely to the schema, so the description neither compensates for the gap nor adds meaning beyond structured fields.

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?

States a specific verb ('List') and resource ('sent emails'), plus the default ordering ('newest first'). That scope already separates it from get_email (single item) and list_inbound (inbound), though it never names those siblings explicitly and 'sent emails' is mildly ambiguous against the 'sent' status enum value.

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 filters imply when the tool is appropriate (browse/filter outbound mail), but there is no explicit when-to-use versus get_email/list_inbound guidance and no stated exclusions or prerequisites. Usage must be inferred from the filter list.

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