draft

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint: true, and the description elaborates on behaviors such as permanent deletion, rate limit sharing for send, and mutual exclusivity of comment and body. This adds significant context beyond the annotations, with 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 front-loaded with a summary and then enumerates actions clearly. While every sentence adds value, it could be more structured (e.g., bulleted actions) to improve readability. Overall, it is efficient but slightly dense.

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 of 11 parameters and 7 actions, the description covers all actions, their parameter requirements, return values, and special behaviors (e.g., dryRun, checkRecipients). The lack of output schema is compensated by explicit return descriptions. No critical gaps.

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?

Parameters have 100% schema description coverage, but the tool description adds critical context not in the schema, such as 'Cannot combine with body' for comment, 'runs mail-tips first' for checkRecipients, and 'preview without saving' for dryRun. This provides essential usage details.

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 it covers the full draft lifecycle with seven specific actions (create, update, send, delete, reply, reply-all, forward). Each action is explicitly described with its purpose and required inputs, distinguishing it from sibling tools like send-email and read-email.

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 guidance on when to use each action, including dryRun and checkRecipients for create, and notes that send shares rate limit with send-email. However, it does not explicitly state when to use an alternative tool instead (e.g., using send-email directly), leaving some ambiguity.

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