Create Mail API Token

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavior, but it only states the action. It does not mention whether the token is returned in the response, any required permissions, idempotency, or side effects beyond creation.

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, direct sentence that wastes no words. It is appropriately front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 tool's simple nature, the description still lacks contextual completeness. It does not explain what the API token is used for, how the token is returned, or any setup instructions. The presence of sibling token tools implies a broader workflow, but this description does not situate the tool within that context.

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 has 100% coverage for the only parameter order_id ('Mail order ID'). The description's phrase 'for a mail order' adds no new detail beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline but provides no extra semantic 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 action (create), the resource (API token), and the scope (for a mail order). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like mail_tokens_list and mail_tokens_revoke by specifying the creation operation and the associated order context.

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 or any prerequisites. The description only states what it does, not when it should be invoked, nor does it mention that list and revoke are the complementary operations.

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