disable_spam_box

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely states the action without revealing side effects (e.g., whether existing spam messages are deleted, whether filtering is affected, whether the action is reversible). This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 very short and front-loaded, but it is terse to the point of under-specification. While simple tools can be brief, a single clause without context feels incomplete rather than efficiently concise.

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 toggle with no parameters or output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks context about the spam box feature (what it does, how disabling it impacts mail filtering) and how it relates to sibling tools like 'clear_spam_box' or 'get_spam_settings'.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is no parameter information needed beyond the schema. The description does not need to compensate for missing parameter details, and the schema coverage is trivially 100%. Baseline 4 applies.

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 ('Disable') and the resource ('spam box'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. It is distinct from siblings like 'enable_spam_box' and 'clear_spam_box', though it could benefit from a definition of what the spam box is.

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. There is no mention of prerequisites, effects, or when disabling the spam box is appropriate. The intended use is implied only by the name and the existence of 'enable_spam_box'.

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