get_email_content

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

There are no annotations, so the description must communicate behavioral traits. '获取' implies read-only, but the description does not state that it has no side effects, what fields are returned, how errors/not-found are handled, or whether the content is plain text/HTML. This is a significant gap for a tool with no annotation support.

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 entire description is one short, front-loaded sentence without filler or redundancy. Every word contributes to conveying the core operation.

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 one-parameter getter, the core invocation is clear. However, with no output schema and no annotations, the description should state what '详细内容' includes (e.g., headers, body, attachments) or clarify the return behavior. It is minimally adequate but leaves the agent to assume the result shape.

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 coverage is 100% and the uid parameter is already described as '邮件唯一标识符'. The tool description adds only that the target is '指定邮件', which does not meaningfully change the agent's understanding of the parameter beyond the schema.

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 '获取指定邮件的详细内容' clearly identifies a specific action (retrieve) and resource (detailed content of a specified email). The word '指定' distinguishes it from get_recent_emails, and the sibling set makes this the obvious getter for a single pre-identified 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 use case is implied rather than explicit: call this when you have a specific email uid and need its full contents. However, the description does not name alternatives such as get_recent_emails or state conditions when one should be preferred.

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