send_email

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

Annotations indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false) and potential destructiveness (destructiveHint=true), but the description adds no further behavioral details (e.g., whether it drafts or sends immediately, or error handling).

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 concise sentence, avoiding redundancy, but it could be slightly longer to include essential context without losing brevity.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, and many sibling tools, the description fails to cover prerequisites, return behavior, or error scenarios, leaving the agent with incomplete information for reliable invocation.

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?

With 60% schema coverage, the description adds no parameter-specific information. Critical parameters like body and subject lack semantic context, and no format or constraints are clarified beyond the schema.

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), the resource (new email), and the context (via Mail.app from an existing account), effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like reply_to_email or trash_email.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to use reply_to_email instead, or prerequisites like having Mail.app configured.

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