combell_mail_zones_catch_all_delete

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

The description aligns with the destructiveHint annotation by specifying that the catch-all address is the object removed. It adds a small amount of context about what gets destroyed, but does not disclose effects such as stopped mail delivery or whether the operation is reversible once executed.

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 with no filler. It front-loads the verb and immediately identifies the resource being affected.

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 two-parameter destructive operation with a destructiveHint annotation and no output schema, this description is nearly sufficient. The only real gaps are the implicit domain_name semantics and the absence of any guidance about expected errors or post-removal behavior.

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 schema already documents 'email_address' as 'The catch-all destination address to remove', and the description echoes that concept. However, 'domain_name' is left undocumented in both the schema and description; the phrase 'from the mail zone' only weakly implies its role as the zone identifier.

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 ('Remove') with a clear resource ('catch-all address') and location ('mail zone'). It clearly distinguishes this deletion tool from the sibling creation tool 'combell_mail_zones_catch_all_create'.

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 intended use is implied by the clear delete purpose, but the description does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusion conditions. It names no sibling or context-based routing.

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