Create IMAP Auth Profile

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

Annotations already declare the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false). The description adds no behavioral context such as what happens on duplicate keys, permission requirements, or side effects of creating a profile.

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 brief and front-loaded, but its purpose sentence simply repeats the title and its second sentence offloads critical request-body detail to an external source. It avoids bloat, yet neither sentence adds much value beyond what is already provided.

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 create tool with a nested settings object and no output schema, the definition is not self-contained. It explicitly tells the agent to see the engine OpenAPI for required body fields, so the definition alone is insufficient to construct a valid request.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the three top-level parameters. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema and defers body-field details to an external document. Baseline 3 is appropriate 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's only purpose statement is an exact restatement of the tool title ('Create IMAP Auth Profile'), adding no detail about what an IMAP Auth Profile is or how this differs from sibling create operations like smtp_auth.create. The pointer to the engine OpenAPI does not clarify purpose.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus imap_auth.list, imap_auth.get, imap_auth.update, or other profile creates. The only usage advice is to consult an external OpenAPI document, which is not a substitute for in-definition guidance.

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