hey_set_aside

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden. It states the return value shape and reversibility, but lacks detail on side effects or permission requirements. It is adequate but not richly informative about behavior beyond the basic move operation.

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 with two sentences, front-loading the action and immediately providing usage context and reversibility. Every sentence serves a purpose without redundancy.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers purpose, usage context, return structure, and reversibility. It is nearly complete, though it could mention prerequisites (e.g., email must be in Imbox) to be fully explicit.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with a clear description for entry_id. The description adds the context of using entryId from list operations, which matches the schema. No additional parameter semantics are provided, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 to Set Aside for later.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like hey_trash or hey_reply_later by specifying the target state (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 advises to 'Use for emails you plan to revisit but want out of the Imbox,' providing clear when-to-use guidance. It also mentions reversibility via hey_unset_aside and the required ID from hey_list_set_aside, but does not explicitly exclude scenarios better handled by other tools.

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