emails_create

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Create' which implies a write operation, but doesn't address permissions, side effects, error handling, or response format. This is inadequate for a mutation tool with complex parameters and no output schema.

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 extremely concise at 4 words, which is efficient but borders on under-specification. It's front-loaded with the core action but lacks necessary detail. While not wasteful, it sacrifices completeness for brevity.

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 creation tool with no annotations, 0% schema description coverage, no output schema, and complex nested parameters, the description is severely incomplete. It doesn't explain what gets created, how to use the parameters, what happens on success/failure, or how this differs from batch operations.

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 schema provides no parameter descriptions. The tool description doesn't mention any parameters, failing to compensate for the coverage gap. With 2 parameters (properties and associations) that include nested objects and required fields, this leaves the agent guessing about their purpose and usage.

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 'Create a new email record' clearly states the verb ('Create') and resource ('email record'), but it's generic and doesn't distinguish this from sibling tools like emails_batch_create or emails_update. It provides basic purpose but lacks specificity about what kind of email record or context.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like emails_batch_create or emails_update. The description doesn't mention prerequisites, constraints, or typical use cases, leaving the agent without context for selection among similar tools.

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