maily_export_eml

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and discloses important traits: it writes to disk, restricts destinations to ~/Downloads, ~/Desktop, or ~/Documents, defaults to ~/Downloads, and never overwrites existing files. It also states the return value, though error behavior is not covered.

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 short, front-loaded, and every sentence adds useful information. It covers the output format, destination rules, overwrite behavior, account compatibility, and return value without 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?

For a simple two-parameter export tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers nearly all operational context: file format, location constraints, overwrite policy, and return value. The only gap is that the required message_id parameter is left unexplained.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It richly explains dest_path, including accepted folder/full-path forms, allowed roots, and default behavior, but never explains message_id beyond the schema property name.

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 states a specific verb and resource: saves a message as an .eml file (raw RFC 822) on disk. It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools such as maily_download_attachment, which handles attachments rather than whole messages.

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 gives useful context by noting it works for Gmail and IMAP accounts, and its purpose implies when to use it over maily_get_message. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the usage context is clear.

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