Delete an inbox and all its messages. Mail to the address is rejected afterwards. Use as test teardown.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| inbox_id | Yes | Inbox id (uuid) returned by create_inbox or list_inboxes. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Discloses key behavioral traits: deletes all messages and rejects future mail. With no annotations, description carries full burden; this is sufficiently transparent.
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, no wasted words. First sentence states action, second provides use case. Efficient and structured.
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 delete tool with no output schema, the description covers behavior, side effects, and usage context completely.
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 description repeats the schema's parameter description. No additional meaning added beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.
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 verb 'Delete' and the resource 'inbox and all its messages', and distinguishes from sibling tool 'clear_inbox' which likely only clears messages.
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 provides explicit context 'Use as test teardown', indicating when to use. Could be improved by explicitly contrasting with alternatives like 'clear_inbox'.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.