update_inbox

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

No annotations exist, and the description fails to disclose any behavioral traits such as whether the update is destructive, if authorization is required, or what the response contains. The agent gains no insight into side effects or safety.

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?

At only two words, the description is under-specified. While concise, it fails to provide necessary detail, making it unhelpful for an agent selecting the tool.

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 absence of annotations, output schema, and parameter details beyond 'id', the description is completely inadequate. It does not explain what fields can be updated, the expected response, or any prerequisites.

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 100% coverage, describing 'id' as 'ID of the inbox'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Update Inbox' is a tautology—it merely restates the tool name without specifying what aspects of the inbox can be updated (e.g., name, settings). It offers no distinction from sibling tools like 'get_inbox' or 'inbox_creation'.

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. There is no mention of prerequisites, when not to use it, or comparison to similar tools like 'get_inbox' or 'inbox_creation'.

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