Update Domain

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

The description contradicts the annotation destructiveHint=false by stating 'treat as destructive' and describing the silent retargeting of mail as a destructive side effect. This is a clear annotation contradiction. The description adds some transparency about the effect, but the contradiction lowers the score to 1.

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 concise sentences with front-loaded purpose. Every word adds value: first sentence states action and scope, second warns of side effects. No redundancy or fluff.

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?

Despite having only 3 parameters and an output schema, the description fails to resolve contradictions with annotations (destructive vs idempotent). It omits details about idempotency, success/error responses, and permissions. Given the complexity of conflicting signals, the description is incomplete.

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 has 100% coverage with clear parameter descriptions. The description adds indirect context about catch_all_mailbox_id's impact (changing it retargets mail) but does not elaborate on id or idempotency_key beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 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 tool's purpose: updating mutable domain settings, specifically the catch-all mailbox. It distinguishes itself from sibling domain tools like create, delete, verify, and search, aligning with the 'update' verb. The phrase 'currently the catch-all mailbox' precisely scopes the functionality.

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 implies usage for changing catch-all mailbox but lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It does not compare with other domain update tools (none exist directly) but warns 'treat as destructive', offering minimal situational context. No alternatives are mentioned.

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