Thunderbird error console

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

Annotations indicate the tool is read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds that lines are newest last and that passwords/tokens are redacted before sending. This supplements the annotations without contradiction.

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, each adding essential information. It is front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by usage guidance. No superfluous content.

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 tool's simplicity (two parameters, read-only), the description covers what it does, how to filter, and behavior (redaction). The output schema exists to handle return values, so the description is sufficiently complete.

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 has two parameters with defaults but no descriptions (0% coverage). The description explains the 'contains' parameter's purpose and usage, providing concrete examples. This adds significant meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 tool retrieves 'Recent lines from Thunderbird's error console, newest last.' It specifies the resource (error console) and action (retrieve lines). The sibling tools are all mail, folder, search, or other Thunderbird operations, so this tool is uniquely identified.

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 gives explicit guidance on filtering using the 'contains' parameter, with examples like 'tbmcp' for bridge complaints. It explains redaction behavior. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over sibling tools like tb_diagnostics or tb_status, though the context implies console viewing.

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