get-mail-tips

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

Description adds behavioral context beyond readOnlyHint: true by disclosing it uses existing Mail.Read scope (no extra permissions) and lists the specific tips returned. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

Description is well-structured: first sentence for endpoint and purpose, then return info, then usage advice, then parameter format. Packed with information but efficient.

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 output schema, description adequately explains return values (per-recipient tips covering specific types). Also mentions API endpoint and permissions. Comprehensive for the tool's purpose.

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%, so baseline 3. Description mentions recipients can be comma-separated string or array, and tipTypes filters tips (default all), but schema already contains equivalent descriptions. Minimal added value.

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?

Description clearly specifies 'Pre-send recipient validation via Graph' with specific verb (getMailTips) and resource (recipients). It distinguishes from siblings like send-email and draft by noting this tool is a pre-check and those tools can invoke it automatically.

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?

Explicitly states 'Use ahead of send-email or draft action=create' and notes that send-email/draft can automatically invoke it via checkRecipients: true. Provides clear when-to-use and alternative.

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