check_inbox

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

Without annotations, the description provides key behavioral traits: it is non-waiting, returns extracted data, and returns empty if no emails. Additional details like error handling are absent but acceptable for a simple check tool.

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 sentences, first sentence states action, second defines result. No wasted words, front-loaded with critical info.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately explains return format and usage. It is sufficient given the sibling context, though lacks details on handling non-existent inboxes.

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 describes the single required parameter. The tool description adds no extra detail about the parameter beyond repurposing the tool's context.

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 checks a ZeroDrop inbox and returns recent emails with extracted OTPs/magic links or an empty list, distinguishing it from siblings like generate_inbox and wait_for_email.

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?

It implies use for immediate polling ('right now without waiting'), which contrasts with the likely waiting behavior of sibling wait_for_email, but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives.

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