Gói MONA Mail

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It indicates a read/compare action via 'đọc' and 'compare', implying non-mutating behavior, but it does not describe output format, whether all plans are returned, or any other side effects. This 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 short and front-loads the triggering condition and the core action. The Vietnamese and English sentences are near-duplicates, adding minor redundancy, but there is no filler beyond the bilingual restatement.

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 zero-parameter lookup tool, the description covers enough: it names the object (email plans), the data of interest (price and quota), and the action (compare/read). It lacks an output schema, but the simplicity of the operation makes the description reasonably complete.

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?

The tool has zero parameters and an empty input schema with 100% schema coverage, so there are no parameter semantics for the description to add. Per the zero-parameter baseline, this is not a deficiency.

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 clear verb and resource: compare/read current email plans, including price and quota. It is distinct from mail_plan_set and other mail tools, though it does not explicitly name an alternative, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

'Khi chọn gói gửi mail' gives an explicit condition: use this when choosing a mail-sending plan to read current pricing and quota. It provides clear context, but it does not state exclusions or sibling alternatives such as mail_plan_set for changing a plan.

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