Почтовая информация о домене

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

The description presents the tool as read-only ('Возвращает' – returns), but the annotation declares readOnlyHint=false. This is a direct contradiction. Additionally, it does not disclose any side effects, permissions, or state-changing behavior that might justify the readOnlyHint=false annotation.

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, focused sentence that directly conveys the tool's purpose and output. No unnecessary words or redundant details.

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?

The description explains the return values, which is helpful given no output schema. However, the contradiction with readOnlyHint and lack of any mention of potential side effects or non-read-only behavior makes it incomplete for a tool that may not be a pure read operation.

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 schema already provides full coverage of the single 'domain' parameter with a clear description. The tool description adds no further meaning to the parameter itself, though it clarifies the return value.

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 returns mail domain information, specifically the catch-all address and used space. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_mailbox or update_mail_domain_info.

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 this tool is for retrieving mail domain info but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives. No exclusions or alternative tool references are provided.

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