Thunderbird diagnostics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds specific behavioral details about including unsigned add-ons, experiment APIs, and message store type per account, providing useful context beyond annotations.

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 concise with two sentences, front-loading the main purpose. The second sentence adds detail but is slightly verbose; still efficient overall.

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 zero parameters and a likely output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, usage guidance, and key behavioral aspects. Sibling tools are all mail-focused, so the diagnostic tool stands out. Minor gap: does not mention return format, but output schema likely covers it.

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 zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. No param documentation is needed, and the description does not introduce any parameter-related confusion.

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 what the tool does (fetches a report with versions, profile, capabilities, accounts, indexing) and explicitly says it's the first thing to fetch when things behave oddly, distinguishing it from sibling tools focused on mail operations.

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 explicitly advises 'The first thing to fetch when anything behaves oddly,' providing clear when-to-use guidance. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the context and sibling list make it evident for diagnostics.

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