get_message_detail

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the return behavior by mentioning the full payload and raw_payload format. However, it does not mention error behavior, authentication requirements, or whether any side effects occur, though the verb 'Return' implies a read-only operation.

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 clear sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. It contains no filler and every word adds value.

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 a simple one-parameter getter, the description provides the core semantics and expected payload. However, because there is no output schema and no annotation coverage, the absence of details about returned structure, error cases, or message_id provenance leaves some gaps for an agent.

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 coverage is 0% and the description does not explain message_id beyond the implicit 'a message's' connection. It does not specify the ID format, where to obtain the ID, or how it relates to sibling tools like list_sent_messages, leaving the single required parameter under-documented.

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 states a specific verb ('Return'), a clear resource ('a message's full payload'), and names a distinctive detail ('raw_payload (MIME/JSON)'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_sent_messages, which would list messages rather than return full details.

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 implies this tool is used when a full message payload is needed, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer it over alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions. There is no explicit routing guidance such as 'use list_sent_messages for summaries.'

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