mailkite_rotate_app_password

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses key side-effects: 'The old secret stops authenticating immediately' and 'the new one is returned once.' It also states a prerequisite ('Requires a management session token'), providing meaningful behavioral context that annotations do not convey.

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?

Three short sentences, each earning its place: action and effect, side-effect/return behavior, and usage guidance. The key behavior is front-loaded, with no redundant filler.

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 one-parameter mutation tool with annotations presentcars, the description covers the action, when to use it, the immediate invalidation side-effect, the one-time return of the new secret, and the auth requirement. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 single parameter is documented in the schema as 'Path parameter `id`', which is minimal but present. Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline applies; the tool description does not add meaning to the `id` parameter beyond what the schema states.

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 states a specific verb ('Replace') and resource ('an app password's secret'), and adds scope ('keeping its scope'). It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like mailkite_update_app_password and mailkite_delete_app_password by focusing on rotating the secret rather than editing or deleting the password.

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 gives clear context for use ('Use after a leak') and an implicit alternative ('when revoking would mean reconfiguring every client'). It does not explicitly name the alternative tool or state when not to use it, so it falls just short of full usage-guideline explicitness.

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