List mailboxes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the field set returned, but says nothing about pagination behaviour, ordering, or that results are scoped to a single vserver; with annotations carrying the safety burden, this is adequate rather than rich.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted wording. Slightly awkward phrasing ('on a webhosting') and the trailing field list leans on what the output schema already conveys, but it remains efficient.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be spelled out, and annotations cover read-only safety. For a simple filtered list tool the description is nearly complete; only ordering/pagination expectations and exact-vs-substring address matching are left implicit.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%: page, limit, address and vserver are all documented in the schema, including the default page size and the vserver example. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (list) and resource (e-mail accounts/mailboxes) scoped to a webhosting, and names the fields surfaced (quota, spam level, forwards, 2FA). It is distinguishable from siblings like list_mail_forwarders by resource, though it never explicitly contrasts with them.

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?

Usage is implied by the object being listed: read this to enumerate mailboxes on a given vserver. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no pointer to the closest sibling (list_mail_forwarders) for the forwards data it mentions.

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