hey_read_email

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint) indicate safe, non-destructive operation. Description reinforces read-only nature and details output structure (entries[], attachments[], calendar_invites[]) and format behavior, adding value beyond annotations.

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?

Three concise sentences, front-loaded with main purpose, then details on output and alternative tools. No wasted words; each sentence adds distinct value.

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?

No output schema, but description adequately explains return fields and links to sibling tools for next steps. With annotations, provides complete context for safe and effective use.

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 100%, but description adds context: explains id can be topicId or entryId, clarifies format default and behavior (html = full thread, text = first message only). Provides meaning beyond schema definitions.

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?

Description clearly states it reads an email thread's full content, using specific verb 'Read' and resource 'email thread'. It distinguishes from siblings like hey_download_attachment and hey_get_calendar_invite by mentioning them for further actions.

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?

Provides guidance on when to use format='html' vs 'text', and references sibling tools for attachments and calendar invites. Implies using topicId from list operations, but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool (e.g., for single messages vs threads).

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