email_send

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention that email and password parameters are for authentication, any rate limits, delivery guarantees, or error scenarios. The description is too minimal to inform an agent about side effects or constraints.

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?

While very concise (one sentence), the description is under-specified for a tool with 7 parameters and no annotations. It sacrifices necessary detail in favor of brevity, leaving critical information absent.

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, no annotations, no output schema), the description is grossly incomplete. It does not explain authentication, return value, or how to handle failures. Among sibling email tools, it is the only send tool, but that context is not leveraged.

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 description coverage is 0% and the description does not explain any parameter's meaning beyond their names. It adds no value over the schema—missing details like the format of 'to' (single or comma-separated?), or that 'email' and 'password' are authentication credentials.

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 'Send an email via Gmail/IMAP' clearly states the action (send email) and the service (Gmail/IMAP), distinguishing it from sibling tools like email_delete, email_get, email_read_inbox, and email_search which perform different operations.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, typical use cases, or situations where another email tool (e.g., email_read_inbox) would be more appropriate.

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