send_test_email

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool sends a test version to a pre-configured list, which is a non-destructive action. It does not mention side effects or permissions, but the behavior is straightforward.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the action and purpose.

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?

The description is adequate for a simple tool with no output schema. It covers purpose, parameters, and usage context. However, it does not mention what the response indicates (e.g., success/failure), but this is minor given the tool's simplicity.

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% and the description adds value beyond the schema by explaining that 'emailTo' is optional to override the test list, and advising normally to omit it. This provides clear usage guidance for both parameters.

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 action ('Send a test version of a campaign'), the target ('to your pre-configured Brevo test list'), and the purpose ('for review before sending to actual recipients'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'send_campaign_now' which sends to actual recipients.

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 implies when to use (before actual sending) by stating 'for review before sending to actual recipients'. However, it does not explicitly list when not to use or compare to alternatives like 'send_email' or 'send_campaign_now', though the purpose is clear.

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