avanan_quarantine_emails

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

Beyond the annotations, the description adds crucial behavioral context: the operation is reversible via avanan_restore_emails, it returns task IDs, and it requires user confirmation. This materially helps an agent understand consequences and follow-up actions.

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 four short, purposeful clauses: impact warning, action, reversibility, output, and confirmation requirement. Every sentence earns its place and the most important caution is front-loaded.

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 quarantine tool with no output schema, the description covers the action, impact, return value, reversal path, and user-confirmation requirement. An agent has enough context to invoke it correctly and know what to expect.

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 describes all three parameters with 100% coverage, so the description gets the baseline 3. It reinforces that entityIds identify the entities to quarantine, but it does not add new parameter-level detail beyond the 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 states a specific verb ('quarantine'), a clear resource ('secured entities (emails)'), and the selection mechanism ('by entity ID'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like avanan_quarantine_events and avanan_restore_emails without needing to inspect schemas.

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?

It clearly signals high impact and mandates user confirmation, and it names avanan_restore_emails as the reversal path. It does not explicitly forbid use in favor of avanan_quarantine_events, but the email-vs-event resource distinction is evident enough for an agent to route correctly.

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