create-smart-mailbox

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, and it delivers: it discloses direct plist editing, backup creation (.bak), atomic writes, that existing smart mailboxes are not rewritten, and that Mail is not quit automatically. It also warns about Mail overwriting plist edits if running, which is valuable behavioral transparency.

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 structured with clear labeled sections: use when, returns, do not use, and safety. It is front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence adds distinct, useful information without 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?

The description fully covers invocation context, return behavior, exclusions, safety mechanisms, and operational prerequisites (quitting Mail). An output schema exists, so return-value detail is not required; remaining minor gaps like combined-criteria semantics do not undermine completeness.

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 describes three of four params with 'contains' phrasing (75% coverage); the description adds the concept of 'substring' and groups them as sender/subject/body criteria. This provides some semantic clarification beyond the schema, though it does not give deep per-parameter details.

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 opens with 'Use when: creating an Apple Mail smart mailbox (a criteria-based virtual view)' and names the specific action and resource. It clearly distinguishes from 'create-mailbox' for real folders, and specifies the matching criteria (sender, subject, body substring).

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 includes explicit 'Use when' and 'Do not use when' instructions, citing 'create-mailbox' as the alternative for real folders. It also adds actionable context like German-localized macOS compatibility and the instruction to quit Mail first, giving the agent clear conditions for appropriate use.

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