ews_resolve_attendees

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It explains the resolution process but does not disclose side effects, permissions, or behavior on no match. Adequate but could be more thorough.

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 with no filler. Front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by direct usage guidance. Every sentence adds value.

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?

For a simple directory resolution tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose and key usage. However, it omits what happens if no match is found and the format of the returned data. Adequate but not fully 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 50% only for 'attendees', and the description repeats that info. The 'limit' parameter lacks description in both schema and description, leaving its purpose unclear. Description fails to compensate for low schema coverage.

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?

Clearly states the tool resolves attendee names against a company Exchange directory, with specific verb 'Resolve' and resource 'attendees, aliases, or email addresses'. Distinct from sibling tools that handle meetings and calendar events.

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?

Explicitly mentions 'before scheduling' as the context and instructs to ask the user if multiple matches occur. Does not explicitly exclude alternatives, but sibling tools don't offer similar functionality.

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