about_sandbox

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose one meaningful trait: 'No network call', telling the agent there are no side effects and no latency/cost. It does not say whether output is static text or account-dependent, which matters given 'how to connect an account' may or may not reflect account state.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the verb and the three topics it covers, ending with the no-network constraint. Nothing is wasted and nothing is missing from the sentence.

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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema informational tool, the description adequately frames what the agent gets back: sandbox capability summary, limits, and a connection path. Minor gap is not clarifying whether the account-connection portion depends on current account state.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; there is no parameter semantics to document or compensate for.

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?

States a concrete verb (Explain) and enumerates exactly what is explained: sandbox capabilities without an account, sandbox limits, and account connection. This clearly separates it from the endpoint/request management siblings, though it does not name them.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: 'No network call' signals this is a free, offline informational call, and 'without a webhooks.cc account' hints at the pre-authentication scenario. It never explicitly says when to call this versus connect_account or the other siblings.

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