mail_updateForwarderKeepCopySettingV1

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the core behavior (enable/disable keep copy) but omits details like error handling, permissions required, or side effects (e.g., does it send confirmation?). The description is minimally adequate for a simple toggle.

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 sentence with no wasted words. It is perfectly concise and front-loaded with the primary purpose.

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 toggle with two well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description is largely complete. It explains the effect clearly. However, it lacks any mention of prerequisites (e.g., forwarder must exist) or return behavior, which could be helpful for an agent.

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 both parameters already have clear definitions in the schema. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what is already in the input schema, thus meeting the baseline of 3.

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 uses a specific verb ('Enable or disable') and identifies the resource ('keeping a copy of forwarded messages in the mailbox'). It clearly distinguishes this tool from sibling mail tools like mail_createForwarder or mail_deleteForwarder, which perform different actions on forwarders.

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 the tool is used to toggle the keep-copy setting on an existing forwarder, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., creating a new forwarder with the setting). No prerequisites or conditions are mentioned.

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