gmail_set_vacation

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

There are no annotations to cover safety or side effects, and the description does not disclose any behavioral details such as whether settings are overwritten, how enable=false behaves, time zone handling, or permission requirements. The description only restates the action without explaining consequences.

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 sentence with no wasted words, but it is severely under-specified for a tool with 8 parameters and configuration options. This is not effective conciseness; it omits essential structure and guidance.

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's complexity (8 parameters), the absence of annotations, and an output schema, the description is grossly incomplete. It does not explain how to disable the responder, the meaning of time windows, or the relationship with gmail_get_vacation, leaving the agent with insufficient 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 0%, and the description mentions none of the 8 parameters. It provides no meaning for fields like enable, start_time, end_time, domain_only, or contacts_only, leaving the agent without any clue about their semantics.

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 uses a specific verb ('Set') and identifies the resource ('Gmail vacation/auto-reply responder'). It clearly distinguishes the tool from its sibling gmail_get_vacation by indicating a write operation versus a read operation.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as gmail_get_vacation or other gmail tools. The usage is only implied by the verb 'Set' and the resource name, with no explicit context or exclusions.

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