Send Mail Draft

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'requires confirmation' but does not explain what this means operationally (e.g., user prompt, parameter dependency). The 'id' parameter suggests sending a specific draft, but no side effects (like deletion) are disclosed.

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 very short (two sentences) but lacks necessary detail. While concise, it does not adequately inform the agent about usage or parameters, making it under-specified rather than efficiently informative.

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 lack of output schema and annotations, and low schema coverage, the description should provide comprehensive context. It fails to explain the purpose of 'confirm' and 'reason', the outcome of sending, or any prerequisites, leaving significant 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no information about any of the three parameters ('id', 'confirm', 'reason'). The only hint is 'requires confirmation', but the 'confirm' parameter is not required and its role is unclear.

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 verb 'send' and the resource 'Apple Mail draft', making the action clear. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'mail_create_draft' or 'mail_read', so the score is slightly reduced.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The mention of 'requires confirmation' is vague and does not specify when confirmation is needed or how it is handled.

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