Create alias

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It accurately conveys the core redirection behavior and a precondition, but it does not disclose side effects, error handling, rate limits, or any return value details. This is adequate but not comprehensive for a mutation tool.

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 exactly two sentences, front-loads the primary action, and includes a necessary constraint. There is no redundant wording or filler.

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 simple create tool with fully documented parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and a key prerequisite. However, it lacks guidance on when to use it versus siblings, and does not mention typical response or error scenarios. It is complete enough but leaves minor gaps.

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%, so the schema fully documents all three parameters. The description adds meaning by explaining the overall purpose (redirecting email) and the domain prerequisite, but it does not elaborate on parameter-specific syntax or constraints beyond what the schema already provides. 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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Create an alias that redirects incoming email to one or more target addresses.' This is a specific verb-resource-action pairing that distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_alias, update_alias, and delete_alias.

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 creating a new alias but does not explicitly mention when to avoid this tool or suggest alternatives (e.g., update_alias for modifications). It does provide a key prerequisite ('the domain part of the alias address must already exist'), which is helpful context but not full usage differentiation.

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