Create User Email Address

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

Annotations already declare this as a non-read-only, non-idempotent, open-world mutation, so the agent knows it writes. The description adds nothing beyond that: no duplicate-handling behavior, no error conditions, no note that retries may create repeated rows despite the non-idempotent hint.

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?

A single short sentence is appropriately sized and front-loaded, but nearly all of it duplicates the name and title, so it earns little of 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 non-idempotent mutation with a nested request body, the description omits everything an agent needs beyond the raw schema: payload construction, duplicate/failure behavior, and side effects. An output schema exists, so return values needn't be described, but the input and write semantics remain thin.

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 description coverage is only 50%, and the description contributes zero parameter meaning. It does not explain the nested payload shape (type=user_email_addresses plus attributes.email) that the caller must construct.

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 sentence largely restates the tool name and title ('Creates a new user email address'), with 'from provided data' adding no information. It does not distinguish this from the sibling read tool get_user_email_addresses or clarify that this attaches an address to an existing user.

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 when-to-use, prerequisites, or alternative guidance is given. It does not say whether the user must already exist, whether duplicates are rejected, or when to prefer another pathway.

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