List Scheduled Messages

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description reinforces the read-only nature and adds useful behavior: the include_held parameter's effect on connector undo holds. 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?

Two compact sentences with no wasted words. Front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence provides value.

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?

The tool has 3 common parameters and an output schema. The description covers the main purpose and one key parameter, but omits limit and search. While limit and search are intuitive, the description could be more complete for an agent unfamiliar with the API.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. It only explains include_held, leaving limit and search undocumented. An agent would need to infer their meaning from defaults/constraints alone.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'future scheduled messages', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like shipmail_list_messages (lists all messages) and shipmail_get_scheduled_message (gets a single message). The mention of 'connector undo holds' adds specificity.

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 implies when to use it (to list future scheduled messages) but does not explicitly exclude using it for other purposes or mention alternatives. However, the purpose is clear enough relative to sibling tool names.

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