get_email

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but fails to state whether this marks the email as read, what happens if the UID doesn't exist, or the return format structure. 'Full content' hints at scope but safety profile and side effects are unspecified.

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?

Single sentence, nine words, front-loaded with action verb. No filler or redundant phrases. Given the high schema coverage, this efficient length is appropriate.

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?

Minimum viable for a 4-parameter retrieval tool. While the schema covers parameters well, the absence of output schema and annotations leaves gaps regarding return structure and operational safety that the description does not fill. Adequate but could specify error handling or return format.

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%, documenting all four parameters (uid, mailbox, maxChars, includeHeaders) adequately. The description mentions 'by UID' reinforcing the required parameter, but adds no semantic detail beyond the schema regarding character limits or header structure.

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 verb ('Get'), resource ('full content of a specific email'), and lookup method ('by UID'), distinguishing it from bulk retrieval siblings like get_emails_by_date_range. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from get_email_raw (likely returns MIME source) or clarify if this returns structured data vs. raw content.

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?

No guidance provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_email_raw, get_thread, or read_inbox. Does not mention prerequisites such as needing a valid UID from list_mailboxes or search_emails first.

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