mail_get_message

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses it fetches a full message including envelope and body text, but does not mention read-only nature, auth needs, rate limits, or error behavior. Adequate but not detailed.

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?

Single sentence, fully front-loaded, no redundant words. Every word adds value.

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 no output schema, description explains return content (envelope + body text) which is helpful. Lacks details on error conditions or output format, but for a simple tool it's nearly complete. Sibling tools are many but purpose is clear.

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 baseline is 3. Description only mentions 'folder' and 'UID' without adding new meaning beyond schema. The mention of 'envelope + body text' hints at output but not parameters.

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?

Clearly states action ('Fetch'), resource ('one full message'), method ('by folder and UID'), and content ('envelope + body text'). Differentiates from sibling tools like mail_list_messages (listing only) and mail_search (searching).

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?

Implies usage when a specific folder and UID are known, but no explicit when/not-to-use or alternatives mentioned. No guidance on prerequisites or limitations.

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