proofpoint_quarantine_release

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

The description contradicts the annotation title. The annotation title says 'Release quarantined message (reversible)', while the description says 'Irreversible delivery but message itself is preserved.' This is a direct contradiction. Per instructions, this scores 1 and is flagged as annotation contradiction.

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 and front-loaded with the HIGH-IMPACT warning. Every sentence provides critical information: the action, irreversibility, potential maliciousness, and user confirmation. No wasted words.

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 single-parameter mutation tool with annotations (destructiveHint=true), the description covers the key risks and required confirmation. It lacks details about return values or prerequisites, but given the simple scope and available annotations, it is 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 only parameter (message_id) is already fully described in the schema as 'The quarantined message ID to release.' Schema coverage is 100%, so the description does not add extra semantic meaning beyond the warning that it is high-impact. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 action: 'Release a quarantined message, delivering it to the intended recipient.' It uses a specific verb ('release') and resource ('quarantined message'), and is distinguishable from sibling tools like quarantine_delete or quarantine_search.

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 explicitly says 'Confirm with the user before invoking' and warns of high impact, giving clear context for when to use it. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare to alternatives, but the confirmation guidance is a strong usage guideline.

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