Remind If No Reply

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false. The description adds behavioral details like capturing Message-ID+recipient and scheduling, but does not fully disclose the reminder mechanism (e.g., how it fires, any side effects). It adds some context beyond annotations but not comprehensive.

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?

Three sentences: first states purpose, second explains mechanism, third lists related tools. Every sentence is essential, no fluff, and front-loaded with the core action.

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 tool with 4 parameters (2 required), 100% schema coverage, and an output schema, the description covers the main points: what it does, how it works, and related tools. Minor gaps remain about the exact behavior when the reminder fires, but overall it is sufficient for an agent to use 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 baseline is 3. The description reinforces the email_id usage ('Given the IMAP UID') but does not add significant new meaning beyond what the schema already provides for each parameter.

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: 'Schedule a follow-up reminder for a message you've sent.' It specifies the resource (sent message) and action (schedule reminder), and distinguishes from sibling tools by naming related commands like check_reminders, list_pending_reminders, and cancel_reminder.

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?

The description provides clear context: 'Given the IMAP UID of a message in Sent, captures its Message-ID + recipient and fires a reminder after N days.' It implies when to use (for sent messages needing follow-up) and lists alternative tools, though it does not explicitly state when not to use or prerequisites.

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