hey_reply_later

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

Adds context beyond annotations by stating reversibility and return value ({success, error?}). Annotations already indicate non-destructive and idempotent, but the description provides additional behavioral details.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. Information is front-loaded: action, reversibility, and use case are presented efficiently.

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 tool with one parameter, the description covers purpose, usage, input details, reversibility, and return format. Sufficient alone without annotations.

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 parameter description is already informative, and the description adds value by mentioning 'postingId from hey_list_reply_later' as a required source, clarifying the expected input.

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 'Move an email thread to Reply Later', specifying the action and resource. It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning reversibility and the related tool hey_remove_reply_later.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use for emails you intend to respond to but not right now', providing a clear usage scenario. Lacks explicit 'when not to use', but the use case is well-defined.

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