Mail Diagnostics

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

The annotation already declares readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is clear. The description adds that it inspects 'availability and access state,' providing context beyond the annotation. However, no additional behavioral traits (e.g., what happens if store is unavailable) are disclosed.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no waste. Every word contributes to the purpose.

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, parameterless diagnostic tool with an output schema, the description is adequate but not thorough. It leaves ambiguity about what exactly 'availability and access state' entails, but the output schema likely clarifies the return values.

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 tool has no parameters, and schema coverage is 100%. According to guidelines, 0 parameters baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameter semantics.

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 uses a specific verb 'Inspect' and identifies the resource as 'local Apple Mail store availability and access state.' It clearly differentiates from sibling tools like `mail_send` or `mail_create_draft` which handle different operations, though 'availability and access state' could be more explicit.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention when not to use it or distinguish it from other diagnostic tools among siblings, leaving the AI agent without clear context for selection.

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