get_automation_email

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true, and the description states 'Retrieves the configuration and status,' consistent with a read operation. No additional behavioral detail beyond annotations is provided, and there is no contradiction.

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 concise with a front-loaded purpose sentence followed by a docstring block. It avoids verbosity, though the 'Args' section partially duplicates schema titles.

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?

With an output schema present, the return value is adequately specified as 'JSON with the automation email details.' The description covers the core purpose and parameter roles, but lacks mention of prerequisites or error conditions, which are minor gaps.

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%, but the description's 'Args:' section explains the two required parameters (workflow_id and workflow_email_id). However, the optional 'account' parameter is not described, leaving a gap for that parameter's meaning.

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 'Get details of a single email in a classic automation workflow,' specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_automation_emails' (plural) by emphasizing the singular email context and requiring workflow_email_id.

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 includes explicit usage context: 'Use this to inspect a specific step before pausing, starting, or queueing subscribers.' It provides clear guidance on when to invoke this tool, though it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives.

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