get_email

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It says 'detailed information' but does not specify what fields are included, whether authentication is required, or what happens for invalid IDs. This is a significant gap for a simple read tool.

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?

A single short sentence, front-loaded with the verb, and no wasted words. It is appropriately concise for a simple single-parameter tool, though it could include more detail without harming conciseness.

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?

The tool has no output schema, so the description must explain what 'detailed information' entails, but it remains vague. Given the simplicity of the tool and lack of output schema, the description is insufficient for an agent to know what to expect from the response.

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?

The input schema covers 100% of the parameter 'id' with an example, so the baseline is 3. The description adds slight context ('specific email') but does not enrich the parameter semantics beyond the schema's own description.

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 action (get) and the resource (a specific email), distinguishing it from list_emails which implies a collection. However, it doesn't explicitly clarify whether 'email' includes drafts vs sent messages, but the singular 'specific email' provides enough differentiation from siblings.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus list_emails or other email-related tools. The description only defines what it does, not the context or prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer when to call it.

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