get_message

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds a critical security warning about untrusted content inside a fence. This goes beyond the annotations and is vital behavioral context. It does not contradict annotations.

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?

Two concise sentences: the first defines the tool's core purpose, the second delivers an important safety warning. No filler or redundancy.

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?

The description is adequate for a simple read tool with output schema and annotations, but it misses parameter explanations for include_body and fetch_if_partial, which are not self-evident. A short note about these parameters would make it more complete.

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?

The description explains message_id (numeric id from search_mail) but does not clarify include_body or fetch_if_partial. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate for the ambiguous boolean parameters, leaving their behavior undocumented.

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 clearly states the action (read), the resource (one message), the source (search_mail), and the required identifier (numeric id). It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_thread and search_mail by specifying it reads a single full message.

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?

Usage is implied: it reads a message by ID from search_mail, presumably after a search. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives like get_thread, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. The guidance is implicit rather than explicit.

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