get_mail_mailboxes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of transparency. It describes the return data but does not disclose behavioral traits like whether it is read-only, requires network, or has side effects. For a simple get operation, the lack of explicit mention of read-only behavior is a minor gap.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the main action and specifies the return value. Every word is informative, with no redundancy.

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 no output schema, the description explains the return value (mailbox-rowid and URL pairs). It lacks details on the exact structure (e.g., array of objects) and error conditions, but for a zero-parameter tool, it is mostly complete.

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?

There are no parameters, so schema coverage is 100% trivially. The description adds value by specifying the return format (rowid+URL pairs) and context (account-filter setup), which goes beyond the empty schema. Baseline for no parameters is 4, and the description meets it.

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 'mailbox-rowid + URL pairs' from a specific source (Apple Mail Envelope Index) for a specific use case ('account-filter setup'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_mail_by_rowid or get_mail_detail.

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 mentions the intended usage context ('for account-filter setup'), providing clear guidance on when to use it. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives.

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