mail_mark_read

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

Description adds the behavioral context of removing the UNREAD label, which is not encoded in annotations (non-destructive, idempotent). No contradiction with annotations.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with primary action, clear and efficient.

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?

Provides expected return format (dict with 'id'). Siblings suggest many mail tools, but no prerequisites or edge cases (e.g., already read) are discussed. Adequate for a simple idempotent operation.

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?

Single parameter 'message_id' has no description in schema (0% coverage) and description provides no additional semantics beyond its role as the message identifier.

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?

Description explicitly states the action: 'Mark a message as read in Hermes's inbox (removes the UNREAD label).' It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'mail_archive' and 'mail_search'.

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?

Does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies usage for marking a message read, but no when-not-to-use or comparison with siblings.

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