Import a Mailbox

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

Annotations indicate a mutation (readOnlyHint false) but not destructive/idempotent. The description adds that the import runs in the background and requires polling, which is critical behavioral context beyond the annotations. No contradictions.

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?

Four sentences, each adding essential information. Front-loaded with the primary action. No filler or redundancy.

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?

Given the complexity (9 params, 4 required, async operation), the description covers the main flow, exceptions, and post-invocation polling. It doesn't explain error scenarios but is sufficient for typical use.

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 covers all parameters (100%). The description adds value beyond schema by explaining password type (app/device) and the Outlook provider limitation via dashboard, helping agents use the tool correctly.

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 starts an import from another provider into a shipmail mailbox over IMAP. It uses strong verbs ('Start importing') and specifies the resource ('mailbox'). This distinguishes it from siblings like exports or cancellations.

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 provides clear usage guidance: use app/device passwords, Outlook must use dashboard, and the import is async so poll progress. It lacks explicit alternatives, but the context is clear enough.

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