Reset Mailbox Password

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

The description adds no behavioral traits beyond what annotations already declare (destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true). It does not contradict annotations. The additional 'replacement password' directive is about usage, not behavior.

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 exceptionally concise: two short sentences with no wasted words. The primary action is front-loaded, achieving clarity without excessive detail.

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 existence of an output schema and annotations, the description is minimally complete. It covers the essential action and a key usage condition, but lacks details about the idempotency parameter, side effects, and parameter constraints. It is adequate for a simple tool but leaves 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 coverage is 67% (only 'id' has a description). The description does not add meaning for 'password' (e.g., constraints) or 'idempotency_key'. The phrase 'replacement password' is generic and does not clarify the password parameter's format or requirements.

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 ('Reset') and resource ('mailbox login password'). It distinguishes from sibling tools because no other tool specifically addresses password reset. However, it could be more precise about whether existing sessions are invalidated.

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 provides one explicit usage condition: use only when the operator has provided the replacement password. It does not mention when not to use it or alternative tools, but there are no alternative password reset tools among siblings. Lacks prerequisites like mailbox existence or permissions.

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