Get Sent Counts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, covering safety. The description adds the 'optionally bucketed over time' behavior, which is useful, but it does not disclose return format, default time ranges, or how bucketing works. With annotations lowering the bar, this is adequate but not rich.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence conveys the core purpose and an optional behavior. No wasted words, appropriately concise for a simple read-only stats tool.

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 an output schema and strong annotations, the description covers the basic purpose and optional bucketing. However, it omits the meaning of tag and messagestream parameters and provides no usage guidance, leaving meaningful gaps for an agent to understand full functionality.

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 only 50% (todate/fromdate have descriptions; tag/messagestream do not). The description does not mention any parameters or explain how 'tag' or 'messagestream' affect results, failing to compensate for the missing schema descriptions. The phrase 'optionally bucketed over time' only hints at date parameters.

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's function: 'Get the total count of sent emails' with an optional 'bucketed over time' qualifier. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_click_counts or get_open_counts by specifying 'sent emails' as the resource.

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 usage for retrieving sent email counts and optionally grouping by time, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or mention any exclusions. Sibling names are self-explanatory, yet the description provides no direct guidance.

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