auth_forgot_password

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

The description provides excellent behavioral disclosure: it always returns success to prevent user enumeration, only sends email if account exists, and the reset link is valid for 1 hour. This is precisely the kind of non-obvious behavioral context an agent needs. No annotations exist to contradict this, and the description fully carries the transparency burden.

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?

Three sentences, zero waste. Every sentence adds critical information: the action, the anti-enumeration behavior, and the token expiry. Information is front-loaded with the primary purpose first.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, this is complete. The description covers the action, the security behavior, and the link validity. There is nothing ambiguous left for the agent to discover.

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%, so the single 'email' parameter is well-documented in the schema. The description adds meaningful context by explaining the behavioral contract (email only sent if account exists), which is more important than restating the parameter. Baseline 3 elevated due to the added behavioral semantics that help agent understand the parameter's significance.

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 (Request), resource (password reset email), and the purpose. It distinguishes itself from siblings like auth_login and auth_reset_password by establishing this is the email-sending step in the reset flow. The scope is precise and unambiguous.

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 when to use this tool (to initiate a password reset) and differentiates from auth_reset_password (which likely consumes the reset token). It doesn't explicitly name the alternative tool, but the context around the reset flow is clear. No explicit exclusions stated, but the purpose is well-scoped enough.

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