forward_email

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

The description adds behavioral context for the 'from_address' parameter (must be configured address, defaults to account setting) and mentions a return confirmation. However, it does not disclose sending behavior (immediate or draft), nor any side effects like being non-destructive.

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 front-loaded with a one-sentence purpose, followed by a structured Args list. It is adequately concise for 8 parameters, though the list is somewhat lengthy but necessary.

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 tool has 8 parameters with 3 required, an output schema, and no annotations, the description covers all parameters and the return format. It is fairly complete for the complexity level, though lacks behavioral warnings.

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?

Despite schema coverage being 0%, the description provides detailed explanations for all 8 parameters, including types (comma-separated), defaults, and constraints for 'from_address'. This adds significant value beyond the bare 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 'Forward an email to one or more recipients,' which is a specific verb+resource combination. However, it does not differentiate from siblings like 'compose_email' or 'reply_to_email' which are similar send actions.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to forward vs reply or compose). The description only lists parameters without contextual usage advice.

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