SandMail — Disposable Email API for AI Agents

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the destructive nature ('Delete... and all its emails'), which is critical, but lacks details on permissions, reversibility, error conditions, or rate limits. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action and resource. Every word earns its place, with no redundant or vague phrasing, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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?

Given the tool's destructive nature, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks information on success/error responses, side effects beyond deletion, or operational constraints, which are essential for safe and effective use.

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%, with the parameter 'email' fully documented in the schema. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema (e.g., no format examples or constraints), so it meets the baseline of 3 where the schema handles parameter documentation.

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 specific action ('Delete') and resource ('a temporary email inbox and all its emails'), distinguishing it from siblings like create_inbox (creation) or list_inboxes (listing). It precisely defines the scope of deletion, including associated emails.

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 implies usage for deleting temporary inboxes, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., no guidance on prerequisites like needing an existing inbox or comparisons to other deletion-related tools). It lacks explicit exclusions or named alternatives.

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