Download Queued Mail

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

The annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, implying a functional read operation. The description contradicts the title's implied capability by saying the tool is not exposed and only returns error guidance, which is behaviorally inconsistent with a working read-only tool. No useful behavioral context is provided beyond the contradiction.

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 extremely short and front-loaded, but it is uninformative rather than concise. It has no wasted words, but also no useful content beyond stating unavailability.

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 tool that is supposedly not implemented, the description does not tell an agent what to do instead, what error to expect, or how to handle the stub. There is no output schema, no further guidance, and no alternative tool suggested. It is not complete enough for an agent to act on.

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 coverage is 100%, and the description adds nothing about parameters. Per the rubric, with high schema coverage the baseline is 3, even though the description provides no parameter meaning. The schema itself documents mail_keys and queue_type adequately.

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 states the tool is 'Not exposed on the FortiMail Engine OpenAPI in this MCP version', which explicitly says the tool does not perform its named function. A tool titled 'Download Queued Mail' provides no statement of what it actually does; it says only that it is not available. This is misleading by design, so purpose clarity is minimal.

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 alternatives like fortimail.queue.view or fortimail.queue.list. The description says only that it is unavailable and returns error guidance, which gives no actionable usage context.

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