enable_greylisting

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses the scope ('all domains') and a key behavioral effect ('delays first-time senders to block spam'). However, it does not mention whether the action is reversible, idempotent, or has prerequisites, though these are less critical for a global enable action.

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: 'Enable greylisting for all domains (delays first-time senders to block spam)'. The verb and resource come first, and the parenthetical adds rationale without unnecessary fluff. Every word is purposeful.

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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description is sufficient: it states the action, scope, and effect. It could have mentioned checking status via get_greylisting_status or noted any potential side effects, but the core context is complete for an enable/disable admin action.

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?

There are zero parameters, and the schema coverage is vacuously 100%. The rule for 0 params is a baseline of 4. The description does not need to explain any parameters, and its mention of 'all domains' is a scope statement rather than parameter semantics, so the baseline holds.

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 'Enable' and resource 'greylisting', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like disable_greylisting and get_greylisting_status. It also specifies scope ('all domains') and adds the purpose of blocking spam, making the tool's function unambiguous.

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 implies when to use the tool (to enable greylisting for spam protection) but does not explicitly state alternatives or when not to use it. It could have mentioned related tools like enable_spam_assassin or get_greylisting_status for context, but the intended use is reasonably clear.

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