hey_set_aside

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

Annotations already indicate non-readOnly, non-destructive, idempotent, and open world. The description adds value by stating reversibility ('Reversible via hey_unset_aside') and a side-effect clarification ('Does not affect future emails from the sender'). No contradictions with 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?

The description is two sentences long, front-loaded with the primary action and reversibility. Every sentence adds essential information with no filler.

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?

Given the simple input schema (one param) and existing annotations, the description covers purpose, usage, reversal, and a behavioral note. Including the return format ('Returns {success, error?}') adds completeness. Lacks mention of potential side effects aligned with openWorldHint.

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?

The single parameter 'id' is fully described in the schema (100% coverage). The description adds context by mentioning the source of the ID ('use topicId or entryId from list operations') and linking to the reversal tool. The mention of 'postingId from hey_list_set_aside' creates slight ambiguity but overall aids 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 clearly states the action ('Move an email thread'), the target ('Set Aside'), and the context ('for later'). It differentiates from siblings by explicitly naming the reverse tool (hey_unset_aside) and the associated list tool (hey_list_set_aside).

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 provides a clear use case: 'Use for emails you plan to revisit but want out of the Imbox.' It also notes that it 'Does not affect future emails from the sender.' However, it lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance or comparison with other siblings beyond the reversal tool.

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