Show Company-Level Email Communication

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds that it returns a JSON object and specifies the API endpoint and category, which provides minor context beyond annotations. However, it does not discuss pagination parameters or edge cases.

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 concise at three sentences, front-loads the purpose, and includes essential details like the required parameters and endpoint. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 tool has no output schema and four parameters, the description provides adequate context for a simple read operation. It explains the return type (JSON object) and required parameters, but lacks details on error handling, pagination behavior, or what the JSON object contains.

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 100%, so the input schema already documents all four parameters. The description only notes required parameters (company_id, id) without adding additional meaning or usage details beyond the schema, meeting the baseline for full schema coverage.

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 'shows detailed information around a single company-level email communication' and 'fetch the full details of a specific Emails by its identifier'. The verb 'shows' and 'fetch' are specific, and the tool distinguishes itself from sibling tools that create, download, export, or update the same resource.

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 says 'Use this to fetch the full details of a specific Emails by its identifier', which implies when to use. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternative tools for listing or other operations, leaving usage guidance implicit rather than explicit.

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