Connect a Gmail mailbox

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

The description adds essential behavioral context beyond the annotations: it opens Google sign-in in the user's browser, requires the user to authenticate, and stores the refresh token only on this computer. This meaningfully complements the openWorldHint and idempotentHint annotations without contradicting them.

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 compact sentences, with the action front-loaded and the noteworthy security/storage behavior immediately following. No filler or restatement of schema content.

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 2-parameter tool with a browser-based auth flow and no output schema, the description covers the main agent-relevant facts: what gets connected, how user interaction works, and where credentials are stored. It could optionally describe the post-auth return value, but the description is sufficient for correct invocation.

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 already documents both 'alias' and 'replace' clearly, including the confirmation-only rule for replace. The description does not add parameter-level detail beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 ('Connect'), a specific resource ('a Gmail or Google Workspace account'), and the mechanism (Google sign-in, alias storage). This makes the tool clearly distinct from siblings like list_mailboxes, read_email, and disconnect_mailbox.

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 conveys the exact setting for use: connecting a new Gmail/Google Workspace account under an alias. It implies when this tool is appropriate versus listing or reading mailboxes, and adds practical context (browser sign-in), though it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions.

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