create-draft

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It clarifies safety ('low risk'), behavior ('creates a draft only and sends nothing'), and return value ('confirmation with recipients and attachment count'). No contradictions.

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?

Description is well-structured with labeled sections (Use when, Returns, Do not use when, Safety). Every sentence adds value without 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?

Given the tool's complexity (7 params, 3 required, output schema exists), the description covers purpose, safety, return, and usage context. The presence of output schema reduces need to describe returns. The description is complete for an AI agent.

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 57%, and the description adds context for key parameters: explains that to/cc/bcc are arrays, attachments can be paths or inline objects. It does not detail every parameter (e.g., 'account') but compensates sufficiently for the most critical ones.

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 identifies the tool's purpose: creating a draft email for user review. It uses specific verbs ('composing', 'create') and explicitly distinguishes it from 'send-email'. The resource ('draft') is well-defined.

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?

Explicit directives 'Use when' and 'Do not use when' provide clear usage context, with an alternative tool named (send-email) for when the user wants to send immediately.

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