Send document by email

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds meaningful context beyond that: a real email is sent with the document attached, and replies route to the account email unless replyTo is provided. It still omits the session approval/confirm requirement mentioned in the schema.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the reply-routing detail and the real-email warning. There is no filler, and every sentence adds usable information.

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?

For a 7-parameter write tool with no output schema and very low schema description coverage, the description covers the core send behavior and reply routing but is incomplete. The confirm flag and several optional parameters remain unexplained, which is a meaningful gap for safe invocation.

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 only 14%, and the description compensates for just a few parameters: it implies documentId and to, and explicitly explains replyTo. It does not explain cc, message, subject, or the confirm flag, leaving critical call parameters undocumented for a 7-parameter write tool.

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?

States a specific verb ('Email') and resource ('a stored document') and adds recipient and attachment behavior. It is clear, but it does not distinguish this from sibling tools such as file_email or list_documents.

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 warning 'This sends a real email' gives useful context that this is an externally visible action, and it conditions reply behavior on replyTo. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives to sibling tools.

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