mailbox-settings

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

Annotations indicate idempotent and non-destructive behavior. The description adds functional context (e.g., get retrieves, set-auto-replies configures) that aligns with annotations, without contradictions. No additional behavioral details (e.g., permissions, side effects) are provided, but annotations suffice.

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 with no redundancy. The first sentence summarizes purpose, and the second lists actions concisely. Every word adds value.

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 description covers the primary actions but omits details about the section parameter for get. However, the schema fully documents it, and the description is sufficient for common use cases.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, and the tool description further groups parameters by action, adding clarity beyond the schema alone.

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 manages mailbox settings and enumerates three distinct actions (get, set-auto-replies, set-working-hours) with their specific purposes, distinguishing it from sibling tools.

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 how to use each action (e.g., action=get retrieves settings) but does not provide guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives like manage-rules or create-event.

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