send_email

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, yet it discloses nothing about side effects, irreversibility (sent mail cannot be recalled), rate limits, auth/from-address requirements, or delivery failure behavior.

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?

It is short but only because it is empty; there is nothing to be front-loaded, and the four characters provide no information an agent could act on.

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 side-effecting tool with three required, undocumented parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is completely inadequate.

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?

All three parameters (to, subject, body) have 0% schema description coverage and the description supplies no meaning: no format for `to` (single vs multiple, comma-separated, display names), no subject/body length or HTML/text expectations.

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 text "发送邮件" merely restates the tool name send_email; it names the resource and action but adds no distinguishing scope, recipient/format detail, or reason to prefer it.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, no exclusions, and no reference to alternatives (none of the siblings send mail, but the agent is told nothing about that).

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