Retrieve details of a Zoho Mail account by account ID, or use the configured default account when no ID is provided.
Get details of one mail account. Defaults to the configured account.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| accountId | No | Account ID. Pass as a string — Zoho IDs are 64-bit and lose precision as JSON numbers. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the non-obvious defaulting behavior when accountId is omitted, which is real added value, but it says nothing about what 'details' are returned or what happens for an invalid/unknown account.
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 short sentences, no filler, with the core purpose front-loaded and the default behavior following immediately. Every word earns its place.
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 simple single-account getter with annotations covering safety, this is nearly complete. The only gap is that no output schema exists and the description never indicates what account details are returned, but that is a minor omission for a read-only tool.
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% and the schema already explains the string/64-bit ID caveat. The description supplements this by clarifying that accountId is genuinely optional via 'Defaults to the configured account', which resolves the optionality implied by a non-required parameter.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ('Get details of one mail account'), clearly a single-account read, which contrasts implicitly with the sibling zoho_get_accounts (plural list). It does not name that sibling explicitly, so the differentiation is inferential rather than stated.
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?
'Defaults to the configured account' tells the agent the tool works without an ID, which is useful context for choosing it. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus zoho_get_accounts or any exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.