get_mailing_envelope

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'Read-only' and provides the HTTP endpoint, but omits details such as file size, return format, error conditions, or side effects. The read-only hint is minimal and does not fully disclose behavior.

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 short (two sentences plus an endpoint line) and front-loaded with the core action. It wastes no words, but the structure could be improved by grouping related information. Minor point: the endpoint adds context but is not essential.

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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description provides basic purpose and read-only nature. However, it lacks details on how save_path works, the nature of the returned image, and error handling. Adequate for simple use 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 0%, and the description does not explain any parameters except indirectly via the endpoint path (scanbox_id, uuid). The save_path parameter is not mentioned at all, leaving its purpose and interaction unclear.

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 tool's purpose: 'Download a mailing's envelope image (JPEG) and save it.' It specifies the resource (envelope image) and action (download/save), and distinguishes from sibling tools like get_mailing_pdf or get_mailing_plaintext.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies it is for envelope images specifically, but does not compare to siblings or state prerequisites. Usage is inferred from the tool name and description.

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