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

The description discloses a meaningful side effect (revoking SMTP credentials) beyond the tool name, which is helpful given no annotations exist. However, it omits other important behavioral traits like permanence, required permissions, or effects on associated mailboxes/email rules.

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, front-loaded sentence with no superfluous words. Every element contributes to understanding the tool's action and immediate consequence.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the core action and a key side effect, making it mostly complete. It lacks usage guidance and broader context, which prevents a higher score.

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 already fully describes the single 'address' parameter with 100% coverage, so the description adds no additional parameter meaning. This aligns with the baseline of 3 when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 a specific verb and resource ('Delete an email account') and adds the key scope 'revoke its SMTP credentials,' which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_mailbox and delete_email_rule.

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 alternatives such as delete_mailbox or reset_account_password. The description implies a delete operation but gives no exclusions, prerequisites, or context for choosing this tool.

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