get_message

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It does not mention authentication requirements (though parameters 'account' and 'password' imply them), error handling for invalid message IDs, or whether the operation is read-only. The phrase 'fully decoded' suggests a specific behavior but lacks detail.

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 sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose and outputs. It is front-loaded with the verb 'Get' and the resource 'a single message'. No unnecessary words or redundancy.

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 the lack of output schema and 4 parameters (1 required, 2 nullable authentication-related), the description is insufficient. It does not specify the return format, authentication context, or parameter dependencies. The tool appears to require credentials, but the description does not address this critical context.

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 the description must compensate. However, the description does not explain any of the parameters (message_id, include_body, account, password). For example, it does not clarify the role of 'account' and 'password' or the effect of 'include_body'. The tool name and param titles provide minimal clues, but no added semantics.

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 a single message') and explicitly lists the components returned (headers, snippet, text/HTML body, attachment list). The phrase 'fully decoded' adds specificity. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_message_attachments' which only return attachments.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'search_messages' or 'get_message_attachments'. The description does not mention prerequisites, filtering conditions, or limitations (e.g., only works with a specific account).

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