Verschickt (erneut) die Signier-Einladung per E-Mail an einen Empfänger. Nur mit ownerKey.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Vorgangs-id. | |
| Yes | Ziel-E-Mail. | ||
| ownerKey | Yes | ownerKey. | |
| recipient | Yes | Empfänger-Index (0-basiert). |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It mentions the authentication requirement (ownerKey) and the email action, but does not disclose any side effects, error conditions, or behavior on repeated calls. It does not state whether the operation is irreversible or how the response is structured.
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 a single concise sentence, front-loading the main action and including the key constraint. 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?
The tool is simple, and the description covers the action, target, and authentication requirement. However, without an output schema or annotations, it does not explain the return value, error handling, or prerequisites such as envelope existence, leaving some context gaps.
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 provides 100% parameter coverage with descriptions for all four parameters. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the 'Nur mit ownerKey' note, which is redundant with the schema's ownerKey description.
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 uses the specific verb 'Verschickt' (sends) and identifies the resource 'Signier-Einladung' (signing invitation) via email, making the action unambiguous. It also includes 'erneut' (again) to indicate resend capability, distinguishing it from envelope creation or status tools.
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 sending or resending the signing invite, and mentions the ownerKey requirement, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus envelope_create or envelope_status, nor does it provide exclusions or alternative tool references.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Every tool targets a distinct action and resource: fax, brief, envelope, template, account, etc. There is no noticeable overlap; even fill_pdf and fill_template are clearly differentiated by type of PDF.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with underscores (e.g., account_balance, fax_confirm, search_templates). No mixing of conventions or irregular styles.
With 33 tools, the server covers multiple subdomains (PDF, fax, postal, signatures, templates). This is on the higher side but still reasonable for a comprehensive document processing server. However, it could benefit from consolidation.
The tool surface covers core document workflows: fill, sign, scan, fax, mail, template exploration, and account management. Minor gaps exist (e.g., PDF merging or splitting), but most user journeys are supported.
