Resend verification email

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

The annotations already indicate this is not read-only and not destructive, and the description does not add behavioral details such as rate limits, whether it can be sent only to unverified clients, or side effects on email history. It simply restates the action without enriching the agent's understanding of side effects or constraints.

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, efficient sentence that immediately conveys the action and target without superfluous words. It is well-structured and front-loaded.

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, single-parameter side-effect tool with no output schema, the description provides adequate context. It could mention expected behavior or error conditions, but the current level is sufficient for an agent to understand the core function.

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 100% with a clear description ('Client UUID') for the sole parameter. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 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?

The description uses the specific verb 'Resend' with a clear resource ('the account verification email') and target ('to a client'). It clearly distinguishes from the sibling tool 'resend_email' by narrowing to the verification email type, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'resend_email', nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The usage context is only implicit from the tool name and description, and there is no mention of conditions such as 'only for unverified clients'.

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