manage-focused-inbox

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that the tool can create, list, and delete overrides, which is consistent. However, it doesn't disclose any side effects, permission requirements, or state changes beyond listing. The 'delete' action could be considered destructive but annotation says false; this is a minor inconsistency but not a direct contradiction in the description.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the purpose, and each clause adds information without redundancy. It is efficiently structured for quick parsing.

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 tool with 5 parameters, three actions, and no output schema, the description covers the core behaviors and parameter-action mappings. It does not explain return values (e.g., list results) or notes that 'outputVerbosity' only applies to 'list'. Still, it is mostly complete for agent usage.

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% (all parameters described in schema). The description adds value by clarifying that 'action' defaults to 'list' and that 'emailAddress' is required for 'set' and 'delete' actions. This context helps the agent use parameters correctly beyond the schema definitions.

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 it manages Focused Inbox overrides with three specific actions (list, set, delete). It distinguishes from sibling tools like manage-rules or manage-category by explicitly naming 'Focused Inbox' and the override concept.

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 explains the three actions and their effects, but it does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like manage-rules or manage-category. There is no explicit 'when-not' or context for selection.

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