combell_mailboxes_set_password

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description merely says 'change the password,' which aligns with these hints but adds no additional behavioral context. It does not disclose effects on existing sessions, authentication requirements, or any side effects beyond the action itself. With annotations already covering idempotency and non-destructiveness, the description adds minimal value.

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, which is concise and front-loaded with the verb. However, it is so minimal that it under-specifies the tool. It avoids unnecessary words but at the expense of providing needed context. It is appropriately short but not sufficiently informative.

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 mutation tool with no output schema and two parameters, the description is very incomplete. It does not explain what happens after the password is changed, any required permissions, or how to verify the change. Given the tool's simplicity, more context could be provided without much overhead.

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 coverage is only 50% (password has a description, mailbox_name has none). The description does not mention either parameter, so it fails to compensate for the undocumented mailbox_name. The agent must rely entirely on the schema, which lacks context for mailbox_name. The description adds no semantic meaning to 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 clearly states the action and resource: 'Change the password of a mailbox.' It names the specific operation on a mailbox, which distinguishes it from MySQL user password tools or other mailbox operations. However, it does not explicitly differentiate it from other 'set_password' siblings, though the mailbox resource is explicit enough.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, typical scenarios, or exclusions. The agent is left to infer that it is for changing mailbox passwords, but no context is given about when this is appropriate compared to other mailbox operations.

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