Apply a reviewed batch

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

Beyond annotations, it adds useful behavioral details: repeating the same plan returns the existing operation instead of creating a second job, conflicts are reported per message, and an uncertain outcome stops further work. It does not cover authorization requirements or the role of the confirm parameter, but annotations already establish the safety profile.

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 three short sentences with no wasted words. The core action and return value are front-loaded, followed by the most important edge-case behavior.

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?

The output schema and annotations cover return values and safety hints, and the description explains key failure behavior. However, for a mutation tool it omits the meaning and required use of the confirm parameter, and it does not fully clarify prerequisites beyond the implication that a preview must exist.

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 carry parameter meaning. It only implies plan_id through phrases like 'same plan' and never explains the confirm parameter at all, leaving a significant gap for a two-parameter mutation tool.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: apply a preview once and return its operation id. This clear purpose distinguishes it from the sibling mail_batch_preview tool, which creates the preview rather than applying it.

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 clear usage context by saying to apply a preview once and by referencing tb_operation_status for follow-up. It also explains the repeating-plan case, but it does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or explicitly name mail_batch_preview as the prerequisite alternative.

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