Get Outbound Overview

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, establishing the tool as a safe, non-mutating operation. The description adds only that it returns a brief overview, which is a minor addition and does not disclose behavioral specifics like pagination or aggregation behavior. This is consistent with annotations, and the sparse extra context aligns with the lower burden set by the annotation coverage.

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, focused sentence that immediately states the action and resource. It contains no filler or repetition, and the key verb 'Get' is front-loaded, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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, presence of an output schema, and strong annotations, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks contextual guidance on how this overview relates to the many sibling statistics tools, and it does not explain what statistics are actually included, leaving some ambiguity for the agent.

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 has 50% description coverage, with 'tag' and 'messagestream' lacking any description. The tool description does not add clarifying information about these parameters or the meaning of the date range filters, leaving potential ambiguity for the agent regarding what each parameter does.

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 retrieves a brief overview of statistics for outbound email, with a specific verb and resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like get_delivery_stats or get_sent_counts, which also deal with outbound statistics, so it lacks full distinction.

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. It does not mention any exclusions, prerequisites, or suggest using other tools for more detailed data, leaving the agent without clear decision-making context.

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