get_mail_account

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already signals a safe read operation. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by explicitly noting that the password is masked, which tells the agent the returned data is sanitized. This goes beyond what the annotation provides.

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. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the password-masking note is appended cleanly without bloating the definition.

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 one-parameter, read-only get-by-ID tool, the description is complete: it names the resource, the selection criterion, and the key data trait (masked password). No output schema exists, but the description gives the agent enough to invoke the tool correctly and set expectations about the returned account data.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the lone 'id' parameter. The phrase 'by ID' clarifies that the numeric id parameter identifies the mail account, but it adds only marginal meaning beyond the parameter's property name. It is sufficient for such a simple single-parameter tool, but not richer than the schema already implies.

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 specific verb ('Get'), a specific resource ('mail account'), and a precise scope ('one ... by ID'), clearly distinguishing it from list_mail_accounts and other mail-account operations. The parenthetical 'password masked' adds a useful distinguishing detail.

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 phrase 'Get one mail account by ID' makes the invocation context clear: use this when you already have the account ID and need a single account, rather than listing all accounts. It does not explicitly name alternatives like list_mail_accounts, but the scope is unambiguous enough that an agent can decide correctly.

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