update_mailbox

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

Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true and non-destructive behavior. The description adds the list of updatable fields but does not disclose whether omitted fields are preserved or reset, nor permissions required. Additional transparency beyond annotations is limited.

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 that packs all necessary field information efficiently. It is concise with no redundancy, though slightly dense and lacks visual structure.

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 and a complex input with many fields, the description adequately lists all updatable settings. It is complete for typical use, though it omits return value and error conditions.

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 input schema only defines 'items' as an array of any object, missing all semantic structure. The description fully compensates by specifying that each item is a dict with required 'target' and optional fields, adding essential meaning.

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 'Update mailbox settings' which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_mailbox, get_mailbox, and delete_mailbox, indicating a clear 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as update_alias or set_autoresponder. It lacks explicit context on use cases or exclusions.

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