gmail_send

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 only says 'Send an email' but does not disclose authentication requirements, error handling, or whether it returns a message ID. The description lacks behavioral context.

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?

Description is a single sentence, front-loaded with the action, and contains no waste. However, it could be expanded slightly to include usage hints without becoming verbose.

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?

With 8 parameters (4 required), attachments, and a contentType enum, the tool is complex. No output schema is provided, so the description should explain return values (e.g., message ID). It does not. The description is too minimal for effective use.

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% with each parameter documented in the input schema. The description itself adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states 'Send an email using a specific Gmail account.' It uses a specific verb and resource and distinguishes from sibling tools like gmail_draft (create draft) and gmail_send_draft (send draft).

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as gmail_reply, gmail_forward, or gmail_draft. The description does not mention context or exclusions.

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