Send email

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It only states the action and a prerequisite, omitting any details about success/failure handling, whether sending is synchronous, error conditions, or other side effects beyond the email dispatch itself.

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, direct sentence that front-loads the action and includes a key prerequisite without excess words. It is appropriately concise, though it sacrifices necessary detail.

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?

With 5 parameters, no schema descriptions, no output schema, and no annotations, the description leaves critical gaps. An agent cannot determine parameter semantics, expected behavior on failure, or return values. This is grossly insufficient for reliable invocation.

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 0%, and the description provides no explanation of the five parameters (app, to, subject, html, text). It doesn't clarify what 'app' refers to, expected formats for 'to' or 'subject', or the optionality/relationship of html and text. The description adds zero value for parameter understanding.

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 (send) and resource (transactional email) and specifies the transport (SMTP). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like push_send, which handles push notifications, and file or deploy tools.

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?

It gives a concrete prerequisite (SMTP env vars) and implies the tool is for transactional email delivery. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or state when not to use it. Since no other email tool exists among siblings, the context is clear enough, but exclusions are absent.

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