schedule_draft

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only states that it schedules a draft, but does not explain what happens to the draft (e.g., whether it becomes immutable, if it can be rescheduled, or what occurs if the time is in the past). This lack of detail is a significant gap for a mutating operation.

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 a single, clear sentence that is front-loaded and free of unnecessary words. It conveys the core purpose efficiently.

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 is relatively simple with two fully documented parameters and no output schema. The description covers the core function, but given the absence of annotations and the mutating nature of the tool, it would benefit from noting any side effects, restrictions, or behavior after scheduling. It is minimally viable but with clear 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?

The input schema describes both parameters fully: 'id' as the draft email ID and 'publish_date' in ISO 8601 format. Since schema coverage is 100%, the description adds no additional semantic value beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb 'Schedule' with a clear resource 'a draft email' and a particular condition 'to be sent at a specific time'. This distinguishes it from immediate send operations like send_draft and from create/update operations.

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 implies use when you want to delay sending until a specific time, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. It does not say 'use send_draft for immediate sending' or provide any contrast with sibling tools.

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