list_mailboxes

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

No annotations provided; the description relies on the verb 'List' to imply read-only behavior, but does not explicitly disclose side effects, pagination, or ordering. It does detail output fields, compensating partially.

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 sentence with a clear front-loaded purpose, followed by specific field details. No redundant information.

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?

Given no output schema, the description provides a detailed list of output fields and usage context. However, it lacks details on pagination, limits, or sorting, which are minor for a simple list 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?

Single parameter 'project_id' with schema description 'The project ID'. The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, which has 100% coverage, so baseline 3.

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 clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'project's mailboxes', and enumerates specific fields returned, distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_mailbox, get_mailbox, etc.

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 explicitly says 'Use before choosing or repairing email defaults', giving a clear context for use, but does not mention when not to use or provide alternatives.

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