update_email_account

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only declares mutation and partial update. It fails to disclose important behaviors such as password encryption (implied by schema), replacement semantics for agent_hashes, and potential side effects like account validation or reconnection.

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 extremely concise: one sentence plus a marker. Every word serves a purpose with no 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?

Given 19 parameters and no output schema, the description lacks information on return value, prerequisites (e.g., account must exist), and handling of array parameters like agent_hashes which replace current assignments. It is insufficient for a complex mutation 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 description coverage is 100%, so each parameter is already documented. The description adds the partial update clarification, but this is largely implied. No additional meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 it updates an existing email account by modifying its fields, and explicitly mentions partial update semantics ('Solo se actualizan los campos enviados'). It is easily distinguished from sibling tools like create_email_account and delete_email_account.

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 usage for modifications via '[mutation]' and partial update note, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_email_autoresponder or update_email_retention. No when-not or alternative mentions are provided.

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