get_inboxes

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full disclosure burden, yet it does nothing beyond restating the name plus a raw endpoint path. It says nothing about what an inbox record contains, whether results are paginated or filtered by account/workspace, or what permissions are needed.

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?

It is short and front-loads the meaningful part ("List Inboxes"). The trailing "Tags: Inboxes" line is generated-doc boilerplate that adds nothing for an agent, and the raw path is of marginal use.

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 zero-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should at least characterize the returned list, but it never does. An agent knows it lists inboxes and nothing more, which is thin given no other structured field carries that information.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to explain and the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly implies no inputs are required.

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?

"List Inboxes" states a specific verb (list) and resource (inboxes), so the operation is unambiguous. It does not differentiate itself from the singular sibling get_inbox, leaving the agent to infer the difference from names alone.

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 when-to-use guidance, no mention of the singular get_inbox alternative, and no stated prerequisites. The only hint is the bare REST path GET /api/v1/inboxes, which implies a read of the inbox collection but gives no selection criteria.

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