send_digest_email

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly states that the tool manually triggers an email and what content each mode includes. However, it does not disclose the broader side effects (e.g., emails are actually sent to recipients, irreversibility, permission requirements), which is notable for a mutating action.

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 two concise sentences, with the primary action front-loaded. The mode mapping is presented in a compact, scannable format. Every word adds value, with no redundancy or filler.

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 tool is simple: one optional parameter, no output schema, no annotations. The description explains the parameter's effect and the tool's purpose. It could mention recipient behavior or side effects, but for a straightforward manual trigger, it is adequately complete.

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?

The schema only lists 'mode' with 'daily | weekly' as a description. The tool description adds essential semantics by explaining what each mode does ('daily → jobs only; weekly → jobs + conferences'), enriching the schema and helping the agent select the correct 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 uses a specific verb ('trigger') and clearly identifies the resource ('digest email'). It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools by specifying the two modes and their differing content (jobs only vs jobs + conferences), making its purpose unambiguous.

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 gives clear context for when to use the tool by explaining the two modes and their effects. It does not explicitly state alternatives or exclusions, but the naming and sibling context make it obvious this is the manual email-trigger tool, distinct from data-fetching tools.

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