mailplus_send_message

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

With no annotations, the description partially compensates by disclosing the mandatory confirm requirement, which is critical for safe use. However, it omits other behaviors like authentication needs, rate limits, or failure modes.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that front-load the action and then the critical requirement. Every word earns its place.

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 complexity of sending an email (with 9 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is too sparse. It does not explain the confirmation requirement in context, how attachments work, or what happens after sending.

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 only 44%, leaving parameters like cc, bcc, subject, attachments, body_format undocumented. The description adds no parameter-level details to fill these gaps, failing to help the agent understand parameter meaning beyond the schema.

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 action ('Send an email') and the resource ('via Synology MailPlus'), and includes a key requirement ('Requires confirm=true to execute'). This differentiates it from sibling tools like mailplus_get_message or mailplus_list_messages.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like mailplus_get_message or when not to use it. It also lacks prerequisites or context about the confirm flag's necessity beyond stating it.

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