get_mail

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral context. 'Get' and 'Scope: mail:read' indicate a read-only operation, but the description does not disclose what 'full details' includes, whether it returns attachments, or how errors like missing IDs are handled.

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 extremely concise: two short phrases that immediately state the operation and scope. It front-loads the core purpose and contains no filler or redundant information.

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 get-by-id tool with one parameter, the description is adequate for basic invocation. However, with no output schema and no annotations, the absence of information about the returned 'full details' structure, possible error cases, or authorization requirements beyond a terse scope label leaves notable 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 0%, so the description should compensate by explaining the meaning of the 'id' parameter. It only says 'single mail,' leaving the agent to infer that 'id' identifies the mail to retrieve. No format, source, or validation guidance is provided.

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 verb and resource: 'Get full details of a single mail.' This clearly differentiates it from list_mails and search_mails by focusing on a single mail rather than a collection or search result.

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 implies this tool is for retrieving one specific mail, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer it over list_mails, search_mails, or get_mailbox, nor does it mention preconditions such as needing the mail ID from another call.

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