forward_message

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only discloses that a new thread is started and body_text is prepended. It omits critical behaviors: authentication implications (password parameter), default attachment inclusion, quoting style, or whether original message is modified.

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 two lines, front-loaded with the core action, and contains no fluff. However, it could be slightly expanded to cover key parameters without losing 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?

Given 8 parameters, no schema descriptions, no output schema, and the complexity of email forwarding, the description is too sparse. It lacks details on return behavior, error states, and authentication context (password), making it insufficient for reliable agent use.

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%, so description must explain parameters. It only addresses body_text (prepended) and include_attachments (optional re-attaching). Seven other parameters (message_id, to, cc, bcc, account, password) are completely undocumented, leaving agents guessing.

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 forwards a message to new recipients, optionally re-attaching attachments, and starts a new thread. This distinguishes it from siblings like reply_to_message (keeps thread) and send_email (composes new email).

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 usage (forwarding vs replying) by noting 'starts a new thread', but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like reply_to_message or send_email. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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