infomaniak_create_mailbox_alias

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

Annotations already indicate a destructive write (destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false). The description adds behavioral context by mentioning 'two-phase commit' (implying a multi-step process) and that the alias receives emails. However, it does not explain the two-phase mechanism or what the confirmation token is for.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action ('Add a new alias to an existing mailbox'), and contains no unnecessary words.

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 the two-phase commit complexity and 4 parameters, the description is incomplete. The two-phase process is not explained, the confirmation_token parameter is not described, and there is no guidance on the return value (though an output schema exists).

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 0%, so the description must add meaning. It mentions 'alias' but does not explain the parameters mail_hosting_id, mailbox_name, alias, or confirmation_token. The token's role in the two-phase commit is hinted but not clarified.

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 action ('Add a new alias to an existing mailbox') and distinguishes it from sibling tools like infomaniak_create_mailbox (creates mailbox, not alias) and infomaniak_list_mailboxes (list, not create). The mention of 'two-phase commit' adds specificity.

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 implies a two-phase process but does not explicitly state when to use this tool, prerequisites (e.g., mailbox must exist), or when not to use it. There is no comparison to alternatives like infomaniak_create_redirection.

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