send_outbound_email

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It states that it starts a fresh conversation, resolves email to a contact (creating a lead), and returns the conversation_id. While it does not mention potential failure modes or rate limits, the core behavioral traits are transparent. A score of 4 reflects good disclosure but minor gaps.

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 concise with two sentences, no wasted words, and front-loads the key distinction (new vs. reply). Every sentence adds value.

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 moderate complexity (5 parameters, no output schema), the description adequately explains the main behavior, return value, and key side effects. It lacks details on error handling but is sufficient for an agent to use the tool 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 baseline is 3. The description adds extra context beyond the schema for some parameters, such as explaining that email resolution may create a lead and that admin_id defaults to an env var. This additional value justifies a score of 4.

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 verb 'Send', the resource 'outbound email', and specifies it starts a new conversation, distinguishing it from the sibling tool 'reply_conversation'. This meets the criteria for a specific verb+resource with sibling differentiation.

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 explicitly tells when to use this tool versus the alternative 'reply_conversation', and explains that it resolves the email to an Intercom contact, creating a lead if needed. This provides clear usage context and exclusion.

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