hec_get_email

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

The description indicates a read operation but does not detail the contents of 'full details' (e.g., fields, attachments) or any side effects. With no annotations, the agent must infer safety. It is minimally adequate for a simple retrieval.

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 a single sentence with no superfluous words. It is appropriately concise for a tool with one parameter.

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?

For a simple get-by-ID with no output schema, the description is mostly complete. However, it lacks information about the return structure, which would help the agent understand what 'full details' means. Sibling tools might have similar brevity.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description only restates 'by its entity ID' without adding format, constraints, or examples beyond the schema's property description.

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 verb 'Get', the resource 'full details for a specific email entity', and the method 'by its entity ID'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like hec_search_emails that list multiple emails or hec_get_event that retrieves a different entity.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus siblings, such as after searching for emails or before updating an exception. There is no mention of prerequisites or context where this tool is appropriate.

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