List Mailbox Forwarding

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's statement of listing is consistent. However, the description adds no further behavioral details such as auth requirements, rate limits, or the structure of the returned data. It is adequate but minimal.

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 that is directly to the point. Every word adds value, and there is no redundancy or filler. It is optimally concise.

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 low complexity (single parameter, read-only, with output schema), the description is sufficient to understand the tool's function. It does not explain what a 'forwarding destination' entails, but with an output schema present, this is not a critical gap. Slightly more context about the return would elevate it to a 5.

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 coverage is 100%, and the parameter 'id' is described as 'ShipMail resource ID' in both schema and description. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so it provides no additional semantic value. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'List', the resource 'forwarding destinations', and the scope 'pending and active'. It effectively distinguishes from sibling list tools like shipmail_list_mailbox_folders by specifying the exact resource type.

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 lacks any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., create or delete forwarding). It provides no context about prerequisites or when it is appropriate to call this tool, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the name.

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