Apple Preview Follow-Up From Mail

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

The readOnlyHint and idempotentHint annotations already establish that no side effects occur and repeated calls are safe. The description's 'Preview... before creating' matches those annotations and adds the context that the tool covers both a reminder and a note, but it doesn't disclose additional behavior such as what inputs are validated or how the preview is returned.

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 focused sentence that leads with the verb and front-loads the preview purpose before the 'before creating' caveat. No filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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?

This is a moderate-complexity tool with six parameters and no parameter descriptions, so the one-line description is enough for selection but not fully enough for correct invocation without relying on the schema's self-explanatory titles. The output schema and readOnly annotations fill some gaps, but the lack of parameter guidance and explicit alternatives leaves the description incomplete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description needed to explain the parameters, but it only indirectly maps 'email' to message_id and 'reminder and note' to the create/title flags. It does not clarify the role of due_date, the default true/false behavior of create_reminder/create_note, or which titles are used.

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 states a specific action ('Preview') and the resource/transformation ('an email into a reminder and note'), and the phrase 'before creating either item' distinguishes it from actual creation tools. It is clear, though it doesn't explicitly name the sibling preview tools it competes with.

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 phrase 'before creating either item' gives a clear condition for when to call the tool, positioning it as a dry-run/preview step. It does not explicitly name alternatives such as apple_capture_follow_up_from_mail or the single-item preview tools, nor state when not to use this tool.

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