Send Draft Email

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that sending requires a confirmation to prevent accidents, but does not explain other behaviors like whether the action is irreversible, what happens if the draft is already sent, or any side effects.

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 short, focused sentences. The first states the purpose, the second adds a critical usage detail. Every word contributes, no redundancy.

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 the tool's simplicity (3 flat parameters, no output schema), the description covers the core purpose and a key behavioral note. However, it lacks information on return values, potential errors, or idempotency, which would be helpful for a destructive action like sending.

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 coverage is 100% (all three parameters described). The description adds value by explaining the confirm parameter's purpose (reduce accidental sends) beyond the schema's note that it 'must equal "SEND"'. Account and draftId are adequately described in schema.

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 an existing draft, using specific verb+resource ('Send an existing draft'). This distinguishes it from siblings like send_mail (sends new email) and create_draft (creates draft).

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 mentions the confirm requirement ('Requires confirm: "SEND" to reduce accidental sends.'), providing a usage constraint, but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., send_mail) or provide context for when not to use it.

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