get_mailbox

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

No annotations provided, but description mentions returned fields and crucial error behavior (ambiguity error when multiple mailboxes exist and mailbox omitted). Discloses it is a read operation. Lacks auth/rate limit info but adequate for a read tool.

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?

Two concise sentences front-loaded with purpose and fields, followed by use case. 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?

No output schema, but description sufficiently explains return fields and error condition. For a simple get mailbox existence check, this is 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, but description adds significant value for the 'mailbox' parameter: explains omission rule and error condition. This goes beyond the schema's description.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves mailbox info for a project ('Get the project's mailbox info') and lists specific fields. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_mailbox, delete_mailbox, etc.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use to check if a mailbox exists.' Provides a clear primary use case. No explicit when-not guidance, but context from siblings is clear.

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