send_email

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

Given destructiveHint: true, the description adds the important behavioral context that user confirmation is required before sending. It also specifies the use of a template, which is beyond the annotation's safety hint. No contradictions exist between description and 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?

The description is two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and service. No unnecessary words, efficiently conveying the core purpose and a critical usage condition.

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 covers purpose, service, template method, and user confirmation, while the schema covers parameters and annotations cover destructive nature. It lacks information about return values or post-send behavior, but given the simple send operation and no output schema, this is reasonably 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?

With 100% schema coverage, each parameter is already described in the schema. The description's mention of 'using a template' aligns with template_uuid but doesn't add new meaning beyond the existing field descriptions.

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 function: sending an email via the ThaiBulkMail service using a template. It distinguishes from sibling send_sms by specifying email and the service name.

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?

It states the key precondition 'Requires user confirmation,' implying the agent should obtain consent before invocation. However, it doesn't explicitly mention alternative tools or when not to use it; the sibling context (send_sms, etc.) provides implicit separation.

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