sage_inbox

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

The description discloses that viewing items automatically claims them to prevent duplicate work, which is a key behavioral trait. No annotations exist, so this disclosure adds important behavioral context.

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 three sentences, all essential: purpose, scope/claiming behavior, and next step. No fluff or 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?

The tool is simple with one parameter, and the description covers purpose, behavior, and next step. However, it lacks detail on the return format (fields of items), which would aid completeness.

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% for the limit parameter, so the description adds no extra semantics. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 checks the pipeline inbox for work sent by other agents and returns pending items addressed to the user. It distinguishes from siblings by referencing sage_pipe_result for sending results back, implying this is the retrieval tool.

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 tells when to use (checking inbox for work) and what to do after (call sage_pipe_result). It provides context on claiming for other agents but does not explicitly exclude alternatives like sage_backlog.

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