get-unread-count

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavior. It clearly states the return value (unread count) and the default scope. It does not explicitly mention idempotence or side effects, but its read-only nature is implied. Minor gap in not stating 'safe to call multiple times'.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the key usage condition, and structured logically: when to use, what it returns, and when not to use. No wasted 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (returning a count), the description covers all necessary context: purpose, scope, return value, and alternatives. Having an output schema further reduces the need for describing return format. The description is complete.

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% and includes the default INBOX in the parameter description. The tool description adds minimal extra context beyond the schema, merely restating the default behavior. Thus, it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 tool returns only the number of unread messages, defaults to INBOX, and can be scoped by mailbox or account. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list-messages and get-mail-stats by describing what it does not do.

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?

Explicitly provides when-to-use (need count only) and when-not-to-use (need messages themselves or broad totals) and names alternative tools (list-messages, search-messages, get-mail-stats) with specific parameters.

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