get_email_thread

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden, but 'Retrieve' conveys a read-only operation. It does not disclose details like whether the thread includes full message bodies, ordering, or whether the operation marks anything as read, which would improve transparency.

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 a single, information-dense sentence. It front-loads the main purpose and includes the key identifier needed for the operation without any 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?

The tool is simple and the schema covers both parameters, but there is no output schema and the description does not explain what a returned thread looks like, how messages are ordered, or whether the folder value is required for a successful lookup. These details would make the description more complete.

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 baseline is 3. The description reiterates the uidOrMessageId concept but does not add meaningful detail beyond the schema, and it does not clarify the 'folder' parameter's behavior beyond what the schema already states.

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: 'Retrieve the full conversation thread' for a given UID or Message-ID. This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like get_email_content or search_emails, which operate on individual emails or search results.

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 the use case: when you have a UID or Message-ID and need the entire conversation thread. However, it does not explicitly explain when to avoid this tool or name alternatives, so usage guidance is left mostly to inference.

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