Create draft

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It clarifies that the tool creates a draft without sending, which is critical behavioral context. However, it does not mention prerequisites (e.g., valid account), error handling, or side effects.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the core action ('Compose a draft'). No wasted words; every part earns its place.

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?

Despite 9 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is minimal. It explains the core purpose but leaves out return values (e.g., draft ID), error conditions, and required permissions. The description is adequate but has clear 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 56%, meaning 5 of 9 parameters have descriptions in the schema. The description adds no additional information about parameters. It does not clarify ambiguous parameters like 'cc', 'bcc', or 'subject' (which is required but has no schema description). The description fails to compensate for coverage gaps.

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 'compose and save' and resource 'draft', and explicitly distinguishes from sending ('does not send'), differentiating it from sibling tool send_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 implicitly tells the agent when to use—when a draft is needed but not sent. However, it does not explicitly state alternatives (e.g., 'use send_message to actually send') or 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.