List outbound logs

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only and non-destructive, so the baseline burden is lower. The description adds meaningful behavioral details: results are paginated, sorted by timestamp descending, scoped to the domain attached to the mail order, and filterable by multiple criteria. No contradiction exists.

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 focused sentences: the first states the purpose and scope, the second lists filters and sorting. Every sentence adds value, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 read-only list tool with a fully documented schema, the description covers the essential operational facts: resource, scope, pagination, filtering, and ordering. No output schema is present, but the description still gives enough for an agent to call the tool correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description mentions filtering by account, date range, status, sender, and recipient, but these concepts already appear in the schema; it adds no new detail such as parameter format or precedence beyond what the schema provides.

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 a specific verb ('Retrieve'), a precise resource ('outbound (sent mail) delivery logs'), and the scope ('for the domain attached to the given mail order'). It also differentiates from the sibling inbound/access/action log tools by explicitly saying 'outbound' and 'sent mail'.

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 gives clear context: use this when you need paginated outbound delivery logs for a domain linked to a mail order, with several filtering dimensions. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives like mail_listInboundLogsV1, but the context is unambiguous enough for an agent to select it.

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