create_draft

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It states the tool does not send, supports replies, and sets threading headers via replyToMessageId. However, it lacks details on side effects like drafts being saved, authentication requirements, or error conditions.

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, no wasted words. The multi-account note is front-loaded. Each sentence adds meaningful 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?

The description is brief and covers core functionality, but lacks context on what happens to the draft after creation, how to manage it (list/delete/send), or error scenarios. Given the simple nature of the tool, it is minimally viable but could be more helpful.

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 high (71%), so baseline is 3. The description adds value for the 'account' parameter (multi-account context, reference to list_accounts) and explains replyToMessageId. However, cc and bcc parameters lack descriptions in both schema and description.

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 the tool creates a draft email and does not send it. It mentions multi-account support and reply capability via replyToMessageId. This distinguishes it from siblings like send_draft.

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 implies usage for creating unsent emails and for replies, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives. However, the context is clear.

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