Get Outbound Message Details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, covering the safety and side-effect profile. The description adds value by revealing the response includes body and message events, which helps the agent anticipate what data will be returned. This goes beyond mere annotation repetition.

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, tightly-worded sentence that front-loads the key action ('Get full detail for one outbound message') and adds a clarifying detail ('including body and message events'). Every word earns its place with zero 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 simplicity—one required parameter, an output schema is present, and annotations provide safety context—the description is fully sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly. No further behavioral or structural information is needed.

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?

The input schema fully describes the single parameter message_id with the description 'Postmark outbound message ID,' giving 100% schema coverage. The tool description does not add any additional meaning or usage guidance for this parameter, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses the specific verb 'Get' with the resource 'full detail for one outbound message', and clarifies the scope by noting 'including body and message events.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'search_outbound_messages' (which implies searching/filtering) and 'get_outbound_overview' (which implies a summary).

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 conveys a clear context for use: when you need full detail for a single outbound message. It does not explicitly list alternatives or exclusions, but the sibling tool names (e.g., search_outbound_messages, get_outbound_overview) make it obvious when this specific tool is appropriate, earning a score of 4.

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