search_emails

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

Discloses key behaviors: returns summaries only, accepts date ranges in ISO format, max limit 50. Lacks info on pagination or sorting, but given the read-only nature of a search, the essential behaviors are covered. With no annotations, this description provides adequate transparency.

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, each packed with useful information. No redundant words. The first sentence states the purpose and filters, the second details output and alternatives. Ideal conciseness without sacrificing clarity.

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?

Covers most important aspects: purpose, parameters, output type, and preparatory calls. Could mention pagination or sorting behavior, but the presence of an output schema mitigates omission of return field details. Considering tool complexity, it is nearly 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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must carry the full semantic load. It explains the query is full-text search, dates are ISO format, limit max is 50, and how to obtain account_id and mailbox_id. This adds essential meaning beyond the bare schema properties.

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 the tool searches emails with specific filters (query, date range, sender, mailbox folder). It distinguishes itself by noting it returns summaries only, and directs to get_email for full content. This differentiates it from siblings effectively.

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 tells when to use this tool (for summaries) and when not (for full content, use get_email). Provides instructions for obtaining required IDs via list_accounts and list_mailboxes. Specifies date format and maximum limit. This gives clear guidance for correct usage.

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