quote_outbound_mail

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the burden is lighter; the description nonetheless adds that no account is required, that nothing is created, and that the returned figure is the published price with a breakdown in USD. Returned-value detail goes beyond the annotations, though the meaning of the closing sentence about the "dry run of the real document" is somewhat opaque.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose and four dense, mostly waste-free sentences. The final sentence ("The dry run of the real document is the exact price for an account") is grammatically muddy and costs clarity relative to its length.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, yet the description still characterizes the price output and breakdown. With annotations covering the safety profile and 100% schema coverage, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly.

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 schema already documents all four parameters including the FedEx ZIP dependency and defaults. The description restates the same inputs (mail class, page count, color, FedEx recipient ZIP) without adding format or constraint detail beyond the schema, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb (price/quote) and resource (an outbound letter) and frames the timing constraint ("before you have the document"), which separates it from send_outbound_mail and get_outbound_mail. The phrase "creates nothing" further differentiates it from the create/send siblings.

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?

Gives clear when-to-use context (price before the document exists, dry run for an account) and prerequisites ("Needs no account"). It does not name sibling alternatives such as quote_inbound_forward or send_outbound_mail, so routing relies on inference rather than explicit comparison.

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