List mail

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint: true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds value by specifying the ordering (newest-first) and clarifying the relationship between sent items and mail history. No contradictions with annotations.

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 sentences efficiently convey purpose, ordering, and filtering options. No wasted words; front-loaded with key information.

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 parameters (one required) and no output schema. The description explains two optional filters but omits the required project parameter and does not describe the output format. For a simple list tool, basic completeness is achieved but gaps remain.

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?

The input schema has 3 parameters (status, company, project) with 0% description coverage. The description only mentions status and company as optional filters, but fails to explain the required project parameter, which is a significant gap. Since schema provides no descriptions, the description should compensate but does not.

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 action (list), resource (mail), ordering (newest-first), and optional filters (status, company). It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'get_email' by specifying it's a list operation, and the mention of 'Sent items form the mail history' adds specific context.

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 clear context on when to use the tool (listing mail with optional filters) and mentions that sent items form the mail history. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or suggest alternatives, leaving some room for improvement.

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