send-email

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

Beyond annotations (destructiveHint: true), description explains that it sends external comms, subject to rate limits and recipient allowlist, and that calls outside allowlist fail before Graph request. Provides detailed safety control behavior.

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?

Single paragraph but well-structured with core purpose first. Contains multiple pieces of information but each is relevant. Could be slightly more concise, but overall effective.

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 9 parameters and no output schema, description covers safety, rate limits, allowlist, alternatives, parameter usage, and return value. Complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 has 100% coverage, so baseline is 3. Description adds value by explaining interaction of dryRun and checkRecipients, accepting both string and array inputs, and describing return 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?

The description clearly states it composes and sends an email immediately, notes it is destructive, and returns confirmation with an id. It distinguishes from sibling 'draft' by specifying that for multi-step workflows draft is preferred.

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 tells when to use (immediate send with safety controls) and when not to (prefer draft for multi-step compose/review). Mentions alternatives like 'get-mail-tips' and provides specific usage for dryRun and checkRecipients.

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