read-email

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds extensive behavioral detail: HTML stripping, Markdown output, default field set, mode-specific outputs (headers, raw JSON, grouping, verbosity levels). No contradictions.

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 dense paragraph but is front-loaded with the core purpose. It efficiently packs many details but could benefit from bullet points or clearer separation of modes. No unnecessary words.

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 complexity (7 parameters, conditional behaviors, no output schema), the description covers all significant use cases: default read, headers mode, important-only, grouping, raw output, and verbosity. It lists return fields comprehensively.

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 coverage is 100%, but the description adds crucial context: it explains conditional interactions (e.g., headersMode changes output entirely, importantOnly works with headersMode, raw only for headersMode) and default values for each parameter. This goes beyond schema descriptions.

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 tool reads a single email by ID (read-only) and lists the returned fields (subject, from/to/cc, etc.). It distinguishes from siblings like send-email or update-email through its name and read-only nature.

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 explains when to use different modes (headersMode for forensic headers, importantOnly for security-relevant subset, etc.) and default behavior. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings but provides enough context for appropriate use.

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