Set the name signed on reply drafts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'for this session' indicating session-level scope but does not disclose other behavioral traits such as whether the setting persists across sessions, what happens if called multiple times, or side effects. The advanced note about README is vague.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the core action. It provides the essential purpose, usage timing, and an advanced note without excessive verbosity. Well-structured for quick comprehension.

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 no output schema and four parameters with moderate complexity, the description covers the primary function and timing but lacks information about return values, error conditions, or prerequisites beyond login. It is adequate but not fully exhaustive.

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 0%, so the description must add meaning. It explains that 'name' is the display name for reply drafts, 'followUpLabel' is the Gmail follow-up label, and 'accountAlias'/'chatScope' are advanced parameters for multi-account scenarios. This adds context, but does not detail constraints like length or pattern from 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?

The description clearly states the tool saves the display name for reply drafts and optionally a follow-up label. The verb 'saves' and resource 'display name used on reply drafts' are specific. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'set_signer' tool, though the name suggests multi-account scope.

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?

The description gives a usage context: 'Call after login when the user says how they want to sign.' This provides guidance on when to use the tool but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives among sibling tools.

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