create_draft

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

The description says the tool saves a draft and never sends, which is clear. However, with zero parameters in the input schema, it fails to explain how the email content is determined or what context is used. This omission makes the behavior ambiguous, as the agent cannot know what email is being saved.

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, front-loading the purpose. However, it omits critical information about parameterless input, which reduces effectiveness.

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 zero parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should explain the mechanism for specifying email content. It does not, leaving the agent with significant uncertainty about invocation. The tool's simplicity exacerbates the gap.

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?

With zero parameters, schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 4. However, the description does not add meaningful context about how the draft content is sourced (e.g., from current email composition). It provides no clarification beyond the schema.

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 action ('Saves an email'), the target ('Mail.app Drafts folder'), and a key distinction ('never sends'). It differentiates from sibling tools like send_email by explicitly stating it never sends.

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 implicitly guides usage by stating 'never sends', indicating this tool is for draft creation, not sending. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites like composing an email first.

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