get_email

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. "Get" implies a non-mutating lookup and the description usefully discloses that delivery status is part of the response, but it says nothing about behavior on a missing/invalid ID, permission requirements, or whether delivery status is live or a snapshot.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though the space saved is not reinvested in sibling disambiguation or return-content detail.

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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers the essentials. It remains incomplete on how this differs from get_inbound_email and on the meaning of "delivery status," which an agent would need to set expectations.

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% with a single required parameter already documented as "Email UUID." The description's "by ID" adds no meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Get an email") and adds scope beyond the name by noting it returns the email plus its delivery status. It does not, however, differentiate itself from nearby siblings such as get_inbound_email or list_emails, so an agent must infer which 'email' this fetches.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus get_inbound_email, list_emails, or search_mailbox. The only implicit guidance is "by ID," which the schema already enforces via the required id field.

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