m365_send_email

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It only mentions 'via the cloud', but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, potential side effects, or return behavior. The truncated description leaves significant 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 a single sentence that is cut off (ends with '...'), making it incomplete. While conciseness is generally good, truncation damages clarity and completeness. The structure is poor due to the truncated ending.

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 no parameters or output schema, the description should explain how the tool works or what it needs. The incomplete sentence fails to provide sufficient context. The tool likely requires additional inputs (e.g., recipient, subject, body) but none are defined, leaving major gaps in understanding.

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?

The tool has 0 parameters, and the input schema is empty. The description does not need to add parameter meaning since none exist. Schema description coverage is 100% (vaccuously). A baseline of 4 is appropriate for zero-parameter tools.

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 states 'send from their Microsoft 365 / Outlook account via the cloud', which indicates the tool is for sending emails through M365/Outlook. However, the description is cut off and incomplete, lacking a clear verb. The tool name reinforces the purpose, but the description alone does not fully articulate the action.

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 provides a usage context: 'Use this when the user wants to send from their Microsoft 365 / Outlook account via the cloud'. This helps distinguish from other email tools like 'send_email' (generic) or 'm365_reply_email'. However, it does not specify when not to use this tool or mention alternatives explicitly.

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