email_vacation_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only describes the result as 'one vacation message' and does not state that this is a read-only lookup, what happens when no vacation message exists, or any prerequisites such as domain/user validity. The read-only nature is only implied by the tool name.

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 definition is very short and has a clean Args structure with no filler. However, it is terse to the point of under-specification, so it is not a model of concise completeness.

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?

For a simple two-parameter getter with an output schema, the core call shape is present. Still, the lack of any usage guidance, behavioral context, or annotation support leaves the definition only minimally complete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. 'user: Local part' is somewhat useful because it clarifies that the user should be provided without the domain, but 'domain: Domain' merely restates the parameter name. No format, combination, or validation details are given.

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 says only 'One vacation message,' which identifies the resource and unit but lacks an explicit verb. The action must be inferred from the tool name 'get,' and it does not clearly distinguish itself from siblings like email_vacation_list, email_vacation_set, or email_vacation_delete.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool instead of alternatives. Sibling tools for listing, setting, and deleting vacation messages exist, but the description never mentions them or explains when this getter is the right choice.

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