get_gmail_message_content

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses that attachment bytes are not returned and mentions the required OAuth scope. It could additionally state if the body can be large, but the information is adequate for a read 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?

Three sentences with zero wasted words. First sentence states purpose, second provides usage alternatives, third clarifies exclusions and scope. Efficient and well-structured.

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 that an output schema exists, the description adequately covers return content (headers, body) and exclusions (attachments). It lacks mention of potential size limits but is otherwise complete for a single-message retrieval 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 coverage is 100% with all parameters described. The description adds little beyond schema: it mentions 'headers and body' which contextualizes the output, but body_format is already detailed in schema. Baseline 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 'Retrieve one Gmail message's headers and body', providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like get_gmail_messages_content_batch and get_gmail_thread_content by explicitly specifying use for a single message.

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 explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance, recommending alternatives for multiple IDs (batch), conversations (thread), and attachments. It also mentions required OAuth scope, aiding correct invocation.

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