List Inbox Reply Queue

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is clear. Description adds value by specifying deterministic behavior and keyset pagination, which are not in annotations. No contradictions.

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?

Single sentence with essential information front-loaded. No unnecessary words.

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?

Description covers purpose and defaults but lacks details on reply state semantics, cursor usage, or relationship to sibling tools like shipmail_update_inbox_thread_reply_state. Given the tool has 8 parameters and an output schema, more context would help agent invocation.

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 very low (13%) with only 'id' described. Description does not compensate by explaining parameters like 'after', 'before', 'cursor', or the meaning of 'reply_state' options. The stated defaults are already in 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?

Description clearly states the tool lists 'inbox thread reply states' with 'keyset cursors', distinguishing it from sibling tools like shipmail_get_mailbox_inbox_thread (single thread) and shipmail_list_mailbox_inbox_messages (messages). The defaults are properly mentioned.

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?

Description implies use for listing threads needing reply via defaults. However, no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternative list tools (e.g., shipmail_list_mailbox_inbox_messages) or when not to use it.

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