sophos_update_mailbox

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the description's 'update' implies a non-destructive mutation. The description adds that it only updates the display name, which is helpful, but does not disclose any side effects, return values, or permission requirements. With annotations covering safety, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 a single sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and directly states the tool's action. Every word earns its place.

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 simple update tool with three required parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not specify that the mailbox is in the context of a tenant (tenant_id is required) or mention any prerequisites. Given the sibling tools and schema coverage, the description is functional but lacks full context.

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?

All three parameters are fully described in the schema (100% coverage). The description does not add additional meaning or constraints. Baseline 3 is correct as the schema already provides clear parameter descriptions.

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 verb 'update' and the resource 'mailbox's display name', specifying exactly what field is modified. It distinguishes from sibling tools like sophos_create_mailbox, sophos_manage_mailbox_aliases, and sophos_get_mailbox, which have different purposes.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., for aliases or delegates). No context on prerequisites like authentication or tenant selection. The description does not mention exclusions or when not to use it.

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