assistantmail_delete_mailbox

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, and it does disclose the core destructive behavior: the mailbox and all associated messages are deleted. However, it does not state that the action is irreversible, what permissions are required, or what other resources may become orphaned or affected.

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 a single front-loaded sentence that wastes no words. It states the action and its scope compactly, which is appropriately sized for a simple deletion operation.

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 destructive tool with no annotations, no output schema, and two parameters, the description should warn about irreversibility, prerequisites, or at least route the agent to the sibling delete_messages for partial deletion. It covers only the basic purpose, leaving an agent without enough context for safe invocation.

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 0%, and the description does not explain apiKey or mailboxId beyond the word 'mailbox.' mailboxId is inferable as the target mailbox, but apiKey's role in authentication is left entirely to the schema, so the description adds very little semantic value over the property names.

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 uses a specific verb ('Deletes') and resource ('a mailbox'), and explicitly states the cascade over 'all associated messages.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_messages and update_mailbox, so an agent can tell exactly what the operation removes.

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 implies the tool is for removing an entire mailbox, but it never names assistantmail_delete_messages as the alternative for deleting only messages, nor does it mention when not to use this tool. There is implied context, but no explicit selection guidance against sibling tools.

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