conduyt_send_email

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully states the 'either HTML or text body' constraint, which the schema does not enforce via oneOf/required, but it says nothing about sending permissions, deliverability/rate limits, or what contactId validation failure means.

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?

Three short, front-loaded sentences with no filler. The subject-length sentence duplicates the schema, a minor redundancy that keeps it from a 5.

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?

For an outward-facing mutation with eight parameters, no annotations and no output schema, the description omits permissions, whether sends are logged/rate-limited, and what a successful send returns. The HTML/text constraint is the only real added context.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all eight parameters including cc/bcc/replyTo and the sanitization note. The description adds nothing beyond restating the subject length limit that is already in 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Send a single email to a contact') and the word 'single' implicitly separates it from bulk/marketing sends. It does not explicitly contrast with close siblings such as conduyt_send_sms or conduyt_reply_suggestion, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

There is no when-to-use / when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternative among the many adjacent tools (send_sms, ai_compose_email, reply_suggestion). 'Single email' hints at scope but is not an explicit routing rule.

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