get_email_content

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure, but it only says the tool retrieves full content. It does not mention side effects, authentication needs, response format, or limitations such as whether attachments are included. 'Full content' adds some meaning but leaves significant behavioral ambiguity.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to identifying the action and target, making it highly efficient for an agent to parse quickly.

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 operation is simple and the schema covers parameters well, but there is no output schema and no annotation to fill in behavior. 'Full content' is vague about what is returned, and no usage context or exclusions are provided. It is minimally adequate but leaves notable gaps.

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%, and the schema already explains that uid comes from list results and mailbox defaults to INBOX, with a necessary caveat for get_emails_by_label. The tool description itself adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource: 'Get full content of a specific email by its UID.' This uniquely identifies the operation among siblings, none of which offer retrieval of individual email content by UID.

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 only implied through 'by its UID' and the schema's note that UIDs come from email list results and are mailbox-scoped. The description does not explicitly say when to choose this tool over search_emails or get_emails_by_label, nor does it mention the mailbox caveat outside the parameter schema.

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