list_labels

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already informs the agent that this is a safe read operation, so the description does not need to restate that. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotation, but it also does not contradict it. Given the annotation coverage, a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 short, which is concise, but the '(unconfigured)' prefix is ambiguous noise and adds no useful information. This is under-specification rather than efficient conciseness, leaving the description without essential context.

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?

With a single required parameter and no output schema, the description should clarify the expected return format, the meaning of 'account', and the relationship to other label-related tools. It does none of this. The placeholder-like nature of the description leaves an agent with too little context to call the tool reliably.

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%, and the required 'account' parameter has no description in the schema. The description 'List labels' provides no meaning for the account parameter—whether it is an ID, email address, or scope. The description completely fails to compensate for the lack of parameter documentation.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List labels.' This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like label_thread (an action) and list_accounts/list_drafts (different resources). The '(unconfigured)' prefix is odd but does not obscure the core purpose.

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 offers no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this tool is for reading labels, that it should not be used for mutating labels, or that list_accounts/list_drafts serve different resources. The '(unconfigured)' hint is vague and not actionable.

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