get_todays_briefing

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It only says the tool 'gets' data and gives no hint about whether emails are marked read, what time ranges are used, how results are combined, or what the response structure looks like. This is a gap for a tool with no annotation safety hints.

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 efficient sentence that front-loads the tool's purpose and the 'one call' value proposition. It is concise and free of filler, though it could arguably include more structured guidance without becoming bloated.

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 aggregates two different data types, has no output schema, and no annotations describing behavior or response format. The description is enough to pick the tool but not enough for an agent to understand what a returned briefing contains, how results are structured, or what side effects may occur.

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?

The single parameter is fully documented in the schema with 100% coverage, so the baseline applies. The description adds no extra meaning about mailbox resolution, defaults, or how the mailbox parameter affects both emails and calendar events beyond what the schema already says.

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 names a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('today's unread emails and calendar events'), and the phrase 'in one call' distinguishes it from the many sibling tools that fetch emails or events separately. It is not perfectly precise about whether 'today's unread emails' means unread emails received today or all currently unread emails, so it falls just short of a 5.

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 phrase 'in one call' implies this is the combined/aggregate alternative to separate email and calendar tools, but the description never explicitly states when to prefer this tool over get_unread_emails, get_calendar_events, or search_emails, and provides no exclusions.

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