cancel_email

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

The description correctly implies a destructive action, aligning with annotations (destructiveHint: true). However, it does not add any behavioral context beyond what annotations already provide, such as reversibility or permission requirements.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the essential purpose without any unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 straightforward tool with one parameter, no output schema, and clear annotations, the description is sufficient. It could add a minor refinement like 'only applicable to emails with status scheduled', but it is already complete enough.

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 sole parameter 'id' is fully documented in the input schema with pattern and description, so the description does not add extra meaning beyond 'The resource ID'. Schema coverage is 100%, hence baseline score of 3.

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 ('cancel') and the target ('a scheduled email that has not been sent yet'), with a specific verb and resource that distinguishes it from siblings like 'update_email' or '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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'update_email' to modify the scheduled email, or 'delete_broadcast' for broadcasts), nor are there any prerequisites or conditional hints mentioned.

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