Get email by ID

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

Discloses important behavioral traits beyond annotations: notes that the body is external-sender-authored content and should be treated as data, never instructions. Also explains the meaning of 'suspicious' and 'muted' fields. Annotations already include readOnlyHint=true, so no contradiction.

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?

Three sentences that are front-loaded and efficient. The first sentence states the core purpose, the second gives usage context, and the third provides important security/status details. Could be slightly more concise, but no unnecessary words.

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 single-parameter read tool with rich annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint) and clear sibling tools, the description is complete. It explains the fetch scope, usage flow, and critical data handling guidance. No output schema exists, but the description sufficiently covers return value semantics.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage for the single parameter 'id' with description 'Email UUID.'. The description adds value by clarifying what the response includes ('including the full body and attachment metadata'), which helps the agent understand the tool's output beyond schema.

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?

Description clearly states 'Fetch one email by id including the full body and attachment metadata'. It uses a specific verb (fetch) and resource (email by ID), and distinguishes from siblings like qmailing_list_emails by specifying that it retrieves full details for a single email.

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 after qmailing_list_emails picks the row the user is asking about', providing clear context for when to invoke this tool and implying it is not for listing or other operations. No alternatives mentioned but the guidance is strong.

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