gmail_send_email

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

With no annotations, the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It only says 'send an email' with no details on whether it creates drafts, sends immediately, supports attachments, or has rate limits. The minimal description adds little beyond the name.

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?

A single sentence efficiently conveys the core purpose without any fluff. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded with the key action.

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 complexity of sending email (6 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is insufficient. It does not explain whether the email is sent immediately, if it uses the authenticated user's account, or any side effects. More context is needed for an AI agent to use it correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so each parameter has a description in the schema. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond that, which meets the baseline 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 ('Send an email'), the service ('via Gmail'), and the key components ('subject, body, and recipients'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like gmail_list_emails and gmail_read_email which are for reading, not sending.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., authentication), limitations (e.g., attachment support), or when to prefer other sending methods. Sibling tools exist but no differentiation is offered.

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