imap_add_whitelist_domain

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does disclose a meaningful behavioral consequence ('will never be flagged as spam'), but it does not mention whether the operation is idempotent, whether already-flagged emails are affected, or whether authentication/account context is required.

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 short sentences with no filler. The action is front-loaded, and the second sentence adds the key behavioral consequence without redundancy.

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 simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description provides enough context to understand what the tool does and why it would be used. A minor gap is that it does not explicitly situate itself against the spam-domain sibling tools, but this is not essential for correct invocation.

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 already fully documents the single parameter 'domain' with an example, so description-level parameter guidance is not necessary. The description adds no new format, validation, or normalization details beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource: add a domain to the whitelist. It also clarifies the effect ('never be flagged as spam'), which distinguishes it from related tools like imap_add_spam_domain and imap_remove_spam_domain.

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 when to use the tool: when the agent wants to prevent emails from a domain being flagged as spam. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, even though sibling tools like imap_add_spam_domain present a clear contrast.

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