conversations_cancel_scheduled_email_message

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotations. Since annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, the description does not disclose any additional side effects, auth requirements, or consequences. It simply restates the operation.

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-loaded with the action. There is no wasted text.

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 description is too sparse for a tool that has a near-identical sibling (conversations_cancel_scheduled_message). It does not clarify that this tool is specifically for email messages, nor does it provide any usage context, making it easy for an agent to select the wrong tool.

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% for the emailMessageId parameter, so the schema documents it. The description does not add meaning beyond that, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 action: cancel a scheduled email message. It is specific about the resource (email message) and the verb (cancel). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool conversations_cancel_scheduled_message, which could be ambiguous for an agent.

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. There is no mention of prerequisites, when not to use it, or any conditions. The agent is left to infer from the name alone.

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