gmail_create_draft

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so mutation is expected. The description adds the prerequisite of explicit enablement, providing additional context beyond 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?

Extremely concise at 9 words, but the prerequisite is embedded in the purpose sentence. Could be separated for clarity, but overall efficient.

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?

Only covers purpose and a single prerequisite. Missing details on side effects, relationship to drafts, or how the output schema is used. Despite an output schema existing, the description is too minimal for a tool with 5 parameters.

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 provides no information about any parameters. The agent must rely solely on parameter names, which is insufficient for correct invocation.

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 tool creates a Gmail draft, specifying the verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like gmail_send_email, and the prerequisite 'after explicit enablement in .env' is separate from the core purpose.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as gmail_send_email. Only a prerequisite is mentioned, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use context.

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