Creates an email forwarder in cPanel so messages sent to a source address are routed to a specified destination address.
Create an email forwarder
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | Email address to forward from (user@domain.com) | ||
| forward_to | Yes | Destination email address |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
There are no annotations, and the description 'Create an email forwarder' discloses no behavioral details such as side effects, permission requirements, or whether existing forwarders are overwritten. The description carries the full burden and completely fails to address behavior.
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 short sentence that genuinely under-specifies the tool. While it is concise, it offers no additional structure or detail, making it closer to a tautology of the tool name than a useful description.
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?
As a mutation tool with no annotations and two parameters, the description provides only a minimal action statement. It fails to explain expected outcomes, validation rules, or any context needed to use the tool safely, leaving the agent without crucial information.
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 provides descriptions for both parameters (email and forward_to), achieving 100% schema coverage. The description itself adds no parametric guidance, but the baseline of 3 applies because the schema fully documents the parameters.
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 clear verb ('Create') and a specific resource ('email forwarder'), which is distinct from sibling tools like list_email_forwarders and delete_email_forwarder. However, it is brief and does not elaborate on the resource beyond the name.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_email_account or create_redirect. The description simply restates the action without contextualizing when it is appropriate.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.