smtp_list_emails

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for disclosing behavioral traits. It only states the action (list with pagination) and fails to mention authentication, rate limits, or whether the operation is read-only. The read-only nature is implied but not explicit.

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 very concise, consisting of a single short phrase. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and contains no extraneous words. However, it could be reformulated as a full sentence for improved clarity.

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?

Given the simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description adequately states the purpose but omits crucial context such as the structure of returned data, any filtering capabilities, or error conditions. This leaves the agent with insufficient information to use the tool confidently.

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 100% with parameter descriptions ('Лимит результатов' for limit, 'Смещение' for offset). The tool description adds 'with pagination,' which reinforces the parameter purposes but does not provide additional meaning 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 'Список отправленных SMTP-писем с пагинацией' clearly indicates the tool lists sent SMTP emails with pagination, distinguishing it from sibling tools like smtp_send_email (sending) and list_templates (listing templates). However, it is phrased as a noun phrase rather than an imperative verb, slightly reducing clarity.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_campaigns or get_mailing_lists. The description does not mention prerequisites, appropriate contexts, or exclusions.

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