list_right_now

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden and excels: details read-only connected mode, sandbox behavior, hard-stop flags, provenance fields, and safety block in response. Fully transparent about behavioral traits.

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?

Description is somewhat long but well-structured with line breaks and caps for emphasis. Front-loaded with core purpose. Each sentence adds value, though a bit verbose in safety section.

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?

Lacks output schema but describes response components (safety block, items with why-surfaced). Covers modes, safety, flags, and parameter context. Sufficient for a complex tool with multiple modes.

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 low (43%), but description adds significant meaning for key parameters: `messages` explained as untrusted data for sandbox mode, `token` auto-provision, `offset` only in connected mode. Does not cover all 7 parameters but compensates well.

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 returns the 'Right Now' lane with why-surfaced items, and describes two distinct modes (sandbox vs. connected real inbox). This differentiates it from sibling tools like 'triage' or 'why_surfaced'.

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?

Explicit guidance on when to use each mode: pass `messages` for sandbox ranking, omit for real inbox. Warns about untrusted data and hard-stops. Does not mention alternatives or explicit when-not-to-use, but provides solid context.

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