Đổi gói MONA Mail

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses an important side effect – paid plans deduct from the VND wallet and insufficient balance should trigger cloud_topup. However, it does not say whether the change is immediate, whether existing mailboxes/data are affected, or whether downgrades are possible.

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 short and front-loaded: it gives the condition, the action, and the billing fallback in two compact clauses. The trailing English sentence mostly repeats the title, which is slightly redundant but not harmful.

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 one-parameter tool, it covers the trigger, the action, and the payment fallback, which is useful. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it leaves unstated what the agent should expect after the call succeeds – immediate confirmation, asynchronous job status, or any prerequisites beyond wallet balance.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description needed to explain the plan parameter meaning, but it only says 'chọn gói' generically. It does not map the enum values (free, khoi-nghiep, kinh-doanh, doanh-nghiep) or clarify which plans are paid versus free beyond a general mention of 'gói trả phí'.

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 states a specific verb ('change') and resource ('email plan' / 'đổi quota'), and ties it to MONA Mail. It is clear enough to know this is a plan-change operation, though it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like mail_plans.

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?

It gives an explicit trigger: 'Khi cần đổi quota, chọn gói' – when a quota change is needed, select a plan. It also covers a fallback path by directing the agent to call cloud_topup if wallet funds are insufficient, though it does not mention when to prefer mail_plans for inspecting plans.

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