send_document_email

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden. It states the message arrives from TOCOnline's mail servers with the document attached/linked, offering some transparency. However, it does not disclose authentication needs, rate limits, or potential side effects like overwriting permissions.

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 sentences, front-loading the purpose. Every word is necessary, and there is no redundancy or fluff. It is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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 output schema exists and parameter descriptions are complete, the tool description covers the core functionality. It could mention prerequisites (e.g., login requirement) or clarify the from_email constraint, but overall it is sufficient for an agent to understand usage.

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 100% with each parameter described. The tool description does not add significant additional meaning beyond the schema; it merely mentions document types. Baseline of 3 is appropriate as the schema already handles semantics adequately.

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 sends a sales document or receipt via email using TOCOnline's built-in delivery. It specifies the verb 'send', the resource (sales document/receipt), and the medium (email), distinguishing it from sibling tools like communicate_sales_document_at.

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?

The description implies usage for sending documents via email but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as communicate_sales_document_at. No when-not-to-use or alternative recommendations are given, leaving some ambiguity.

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