get_greylisting_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It indicates a read-only operation, but does not disclose the return format or any potential nuances (e.g., whether it returns a boolean or settings object). The description is minimal but accurate, missing some behavioral detail.

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, concise sentence that directly states the tool's purpose. No filler words, front-loaded, and easy to parse.

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?

Despite having no output schema or annotations, the tool is very simple (0 parameters, status check). The description adequately covers what the tool does, and the sibling tools provide context for enable/disable actions. A slightly richer description of the return value would make it more complete, but it is sufficient for this low-complexity tool.

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 the schema is empty. The baseline for no parameters is 4, and the description adds no unnecessary parameter information. There is nothing more to explain.

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 ('Check') and clearly identifies the resource ('greylisting status') and scope ('for the account'). It distinguishes itself from the sibling tools enable_greylisting and disable_greylisting by focusing on the status check.

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 clearly implies when to use this tool: to check whether greylisting is enabled. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives, but the sibling names (enable/disable_greylisting) make the context obvious. For a simple getter, this is sufficient.

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