update_email_folders

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

The description includes a '[mutation]' tag, but annotations are absent, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It fails to mention prerequisites (e.g., account must exist), side effects, or consequences of incorrect folder names, leaving significant gaps for a write operation.

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 concise with a label, a clear sentence, and a mutation tag. It is front-loaded and efficient, though the structure could be more organized. No unnecessary information, earning a high score.

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 the absence of an output schema and the complexity of IMAP folder configuration, the description is insufficient. It omits return values, idempotency, and error handling, and does not integrate with related email tools like 'discover_email_folders'. The tool requires more behavioral context for safe operation.

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% with all parameters described. The description lists the folder types in parentheses, adding minimal context beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the description does not enhance parameter understanding significantly.

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 the tool configures IMAP folder mapping for an email account, specifying the folders (sent, trash, archive, spam). The verb 'Configurar' and resource 'carpetas IMAP de una cuenta de email' are specific and unique among siblings, making purpose unmistakable.

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 mentions it is necessary for bidirectional sync, giving a clear use case. However, it does not provide exclusions (e.g., when not to use) or mention alternatives like 'discover_email_folders' or 'update_email_sync', leaving guidance incomplete.

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