send_draft

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

Discloses key behaviors: sends via SMTP, marks as sent but does not delete, and requires PROTONMAIL_ALLOW_SEND. With no annotations, this provides sufficient behavioral insight for a simple tool.

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 concise sentences with no redundancy: first states purpose, second gives usage guidance, third adds behavioral detail. Every sentence earns its place.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers purpose, usage context, and a key behavioral trait. Lacks return value info, but acceptable given simplicity.

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?

The draftId parameter description in the schema already provides the same context (returned by create_draft, list_drafts, etc.). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 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?

Clearly states the action (send), resource (previously saved local draft), and mechanism (via Proton Bridge SMTP). Distinguishes itself as the final step in a draft-review-send workflow, differentiating from siblings like send_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?

Explicitly instructs use as final step after create_draft and optional update_draft. Does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives, but the workflow context is clear.

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