send_test_email

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses the return value ('transport debug info and delivery status') and implies the tool sends a minimal email. While it does not detail side effects or limitations, the diagnostic nature is clearly communicated, and no contradictions exist.

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?

Two sentences, no unnecessary words, and the purpose is front-loaded. Every sentence adds value.

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 tool's simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers purpose, usage guidelines, and return information. It does not explain 'transport debug info' in detail, but that is acceptable for a diagnostic tool. The description is largely complete.

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%, so the schema already describes both parameters. The description mentions 'Optional custom test body' for customMessage, but the schema also says that. No additional semantic enrichment 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?

Clearly states the verb 'send', the resource 'minimal diagnostic email', and the purpose 'confirm Proton Bridge SMTP credentials and connectivity'. Distinguishes itself from sibling tools like send_email and get_connection_status by specifying its diagnostic nature.

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 advises when to use ('Use before relying on send_email in a new environment') and when to prefer an alternative ('Prefer get_connection_status for a connectivity check that does not actually send mail'). Provides clear context for decision-making.

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