emails_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states this is a list operation but doesn't mention pagination behavior (despite 'after' and 'limit' parameters), rate limits, authentication requirements, or what happens when no emails exist. The description doesn't disclose whether this is a read-only operation or has side effects, leaving significant behavioral gaps.

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 extremely concise at just 7 words, front-loading the core purpose with zero wasted words. Every element ('List all emails with optional filtering') earns its place, making it easy to scan and understand the basic function immediately.

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?

For a tool with 5 parameters, 0% schema description coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the filtering parameters, return format, pagination behavior, or error conditions. While concise, it lacks the contextual details needed for effective tool selection and invocation given the complexity of the input schema.

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 compensate for undocumented parameters. The description only mentions 'optional filtering' generically without explaining any of the 5 specific parameters (after, archived, associations, limit, properties). It doesn't clarify what 'after' refers to (timestamp, cursor), what 'associations' filtering does, or what 'properties' controls. The description adds minimal value beyond the 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 'List all emails with optional filtering' clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('emails'), and specifies scope ('all') with optional filtering. It distinguishes from other email tools like emails_get (single email) and emails_search (search with criteria), but doesn't explicitly differentiate from emails_list's siblings beyond the filtering aspect.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like emails_search or emails_get. It mentions 'optional filtering' but doesn't explain what filtering capabilities exist or when filtering should be used versus other tools. No prerequisites, exclusions, or comparative context is provided.

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