send_quick_email

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

Discloses rate limiting (5 per 5 min) and the one-off nature. With no annotations, the description carries full burden; it could mention delivery guarantees or content restrictions but is sufficient.

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 plus a clear list of parameters. Rate limit is front-loaded. No superfluous text.

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?

Covers purpose, parameters, and rate limit. Missing return value specification, but for a simple send tool this is adequate.

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?

Adds meaning beyond schema by explaining attendee_id source (booking/webhook payload), title as subject, content as body. Schema coverage is 0% so description fully compensates.

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 sends a one-off email to an attendee, with an example use case. It distinguishes from siblings as no other email tool exists.

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 usage context (manual/AI-drafted follow-up) and rate limit, but no explicit when not to use or alternatives. Since no sibling email tool, differentiation is less critical.

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