domains_test_receive

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

No annotations provided; description carries full burden. It explains the creation and returns a token/address for sending mail. However, it does not disclose failure modes, idempotency, or prerequisites (e.g., domain must be configured). Adequate but could be more detailed.

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?

Two sentences, both essential. No fluff, front-loaded with primary action. Efficient and well-structured.

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 with 3 required parameters and no output schema, description explains input and workflow but lacks output specification. 'Returned address/token' is vague; agent needs to know return type for post-processing. Could be improved.

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 covers 100% of parameter descriptions. Description adds contextual purpose but no extra detail beyond what schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate as description adds marginal value.

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?

Description clearly states the action (create a receive test token for a mailbox address) and distinguishes from sibling tools like domains_check (polling) and mailbox creation tools. It uses specific verbs and resources.

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?

Provides a clear workflow: create token, send mail, poll domains_check. While not explicitly stating when not to use, the context implies testing receive readiness. No alternatives mentioned but usage gist is clear.

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