get-mail-message

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds behavioral context: 'Currently, this operation returns event message bodies in only HTML format' and mentions expand behavior. This is useful beyond the structured annotations, though the description could elaborate on other properties or relationships.

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: first states purpose, second gives key nuance (expand and HTML format). No wasted words, front-loaded with essential information.

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 no output schema, the description covers what is returned (properties, relationships, expanded event, HTML format). With readOnlyHint true, safety is clear. It lacks details on pagination for expanded items or response size, but for a simple get, it is sufficiently complete.

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% (all 6 parameters described). The description adds little beyond the schema: it mentions the expand parameter's purpose and the HTML format return. With high schema coverage, a baseline of 3 is appropriate; the description provides marginal additional value.

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 it 'Get the properties and relationships of the eventMessage object', specifying the verb (get) and the resource (eventMessage object). It also mentions the optional use of $expand to retrieve the associated event. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list-mail-messages (list) or delete-mail-message (delete).

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 guidance on using the $expand parameter and notes the limitation that bodies are returned only in HTML format. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this single-get tool versus alternatives like list-mail-messages or get-mail-message-mime. The context is clear but lacks explicit exclusion or when-not suggestions.

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