outlook_create_draft

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

Annotations indicate non-read-only and non-destructive. The description adds context about the draft creation behavior, and clarifies that deferred_send_datetime holds the message server-side after sending. Does not contradict 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?

The description is four sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. It is efficient but could be slightly more concise by removing redundant phrasing.

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 (3 required) and no output schema, the description provides adequate high-level context but lacks detail on optional parameters and return value expectations. It is minimally complete for a standard email draft tool.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains only deferred_send_datetime and reply_to, but fails to describe 7 other parameters (to, subject, body, cc, bcc, is_html, importance), which are somewhat standard but still need explicit documentation for an AI agent.

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 tool creates a draft email for later review/send and explicitly pairs it with outlook_send_draft. It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning outlook_send_message for immediate sending.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool (when human review is needed) versus alternatives (use outlook_send_message for immediate send). It also explains the deferred_send_datetime parameter for scheduling.

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