Microsoft 365 MCP Server

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint:true and readOnlyHint:false, but the description discloses nothing about email-specific behaviors (saving drafts vs sending, attachment handling, recipient validation) or what the tool actually returns. The text describes open extension behavior instead.

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 sentences and structurally concise, but every sentence discusses the wrong functionality (open extensions), making the conciseness irrelevant or harmful for the agent's understanding of this email tool.

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?

Completely inadequate for a complex email creation tool with nested recipient/attachment objects and no output schema. The description describes a different API concept entirely (open extensions) and fails to address email draft creation, sending workflows, or error handling.

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 67% with nested object descriptions for email fields (body content, recipient types, attachments). However, the description adds no meaning for the email context and actively misleads by implying parameters relate to open extensions. The 'body' wrapper object and flags like 'includeHeaders' are unexplained.

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 describes creating 'open extensions' (openTypeExtension objects) for adding custom properties to resources, but the tool name 'create-draft-email' and input schema (containing subject, body, bccRecipients, ccRecipients, attachments, isDraft fields) clearly indicate this tool creates email draft messages. This is severely misleading.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus sibling tools like 'create-forward-draft', 'create-reply-draft', or 'send-mail'. The text discusses open extension permissions and resource tables, which is irrelevant to email draft creation.

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