List inbound logs

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral detail by noting the result is paginated and sorted by timestamp descending, which is not visible in the annotations or schema.

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?

Three focused sentences front-load the main action, list supported filters, and note sort order. There is no filler or repetition of the tool name/title.

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?

For a paginated read-only list with a fully documented 10-parameter schema, the description gives the essential context: scope to a mail order's domain, available filters, and sort order. It does not describe response fields, but no output schema exists and the tool type makes the returned list self-evident.

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%, so the schema documents every parameter. The description's filter list (account, date range, status, sender, recipient) restates schema properties without adding format, precedence, or default-value nuance, so it earns the baseline 3.

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 opens with 'Retrieve paginated inbound (received mail) delivery logs,' providing a specific verb, resource, and scoping to the 'domain attached to the given mail order.' The parenthetical '(received mail)' clearly separates it from outbound and action log siblings.

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?

It clearly establishes the context: use this to list inbound mail delivery logs for a mail order's domain. It lacks explicit 'use X for outbound' routing to sibling tools, so it stops short of a 5, but the inbound/received-mail framing is a clear contextual signal.

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