get_details_of_a_inbox

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as side effects, permissions required, or whether the tool is read-only. The minimal description fails to inform the agent about the tool's 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 extremely concise at two words, but it lacks structure and detail. It could benefit from additional context without being overly verbose.

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?

Despite having no parameters, the tool likely returns data, but the description does not specify what details are included. There is no output schema, so the description should compensate. The current description is incomplete for an agent to understand the tool's output.

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 has no parameters, and the description does not add any parameter semantics. However, since there are zero parameters, the baseline is 4. The description could be improved by confirming the tool takes no 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 'Inbox details' indicates the tool retrieves details about an inbox. However, it is vague and does not distinguish from sibling tools like 'get_inbox' or 'list_all_inboxes'. The name suggests a specific inbox, but the description lacks clarity on what exactly 'details' entails.

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. Given sibling tools like 'get_inbox' and 'list_all_inboxes', the description should clarify the difference but does not.

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