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

The annotations already mark this as a non-read-only, destructive operation, so the safety profile is known. The description adds important behavioral context that archiving is recoverable and operates on a single message, though it does not discuss auth, rate limits, or multi-mailbox behavior.

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 two concise sentences with no wasted text. The core action is front-loaded, followed by the confirmation policy.

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 simple mutation tool with full parameter descriptions and annotations, the description covers the essential points: what it does, where the message goes, recoverability, and confirmation policy. No output schema exists, so return values need not be explained.

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 both parameters are documented in the schema. The description reinforces that only one message is affected but does not add meaning beyond the schema for account or message_id.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: "Move one Outlook message to the Archive folder." It also states the effect, "leaves the inbox and stays recoverable," which clearly distinguishes archiving from deleting or marking. An agent can identify the operation without opening the schema.

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 provides explicit usage constraints: "Use only when the user asked for it; confirm first if it is your own suggestion." This tells the agent both when to invoke the tool and when extra confirmation is required.

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