Get a trip's email-import address

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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the load and does reasonably well: it explains what happens downstream (Wanderlog parses flight/hotel/car confirmations from Booking.com, Airbnb, airlines), that they are attached to the trip, and that they are deduplicated against existing reservations. It omits whether the address is permanent or per-trip-stable, and whether any authorization level is needed to obtain it.

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 answer is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by behavior, a help link, and usage. The final sentence's list ('configuring a mail filter, an integration or copy pasting the address...') is slightly wordy but each item adds a concrete use case.

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 read tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers what is returned, how the imported data behaves, and when to call it. Minor gaps remain about the address's persistence and any restrictions on what email types are accepted beyond the examples given.

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 single parameter's schema description already points to wanderlog_list_trips as the source of the key. The description adds no further meaning about trip_key, so the baseline of 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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Returns the email address you can forward reservation emails to for automatic import into this trip.' No sibling tool offers this capability, and the scope (per-trip import address) is unmistakable.

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?

It states explicitly when to use it – 'when a user wants to set up automated import for a trip' – and gives concrete examples (mail filter, integration, pasting into a forward). No when-not-to-use or alternative-tool guidance is given, but no plausible alternative exists among the siblings.

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