assistantmail_delete_mailbox

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses a key destructive side effect ('all associated messages' are deleted), which is valuable. However, it does not mention irreversibility, authentication requirements, or side effects on related entities such as recipients or policies.

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 with no filler. Every word contributes to the tool's core behavior.

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 and no output schema, the description is under-specified. It omits irreversibility, what happens on failure, and what output the agent should expect after deletion.

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?

Input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It provides only implied meaning for mailboxId through 'Deletes a mailbox' and says nothing about apiKey beyond what the schema pattern already conveys.

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'), names the resource ('a mailbox'), and clarifies scope ('all associated messages'), distinguishing it from the sibling delete_messages tool which only removes messages without the mailbox.

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 when to use this tool: when the entire mailbox and its messages should be removed. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it, mention alternatives such as delete_messages for deleting only individual messages, or note prerequisites.

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