assistantmail_delete_messages

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that deletion happens, but does not warn about irreversibility, the destructive nature of deleting all messages, or what happens if both messageIds and deleteAll are supplied. For a deletion tool this is a significant transparency gap.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then quickly covers both modes. It contains no filler or redundancy.

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 potentially destructive tool with no annotations, no output schema, and zero schema description coverage, this description is too thin. It omits parameter relationships, safety warnings, return behavior, and edge cases such as providing both messageIds and deleteAll, making it incomplete for safe autonomous 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%, so the description must compensate. It vaguely maps the deletion modes to IDs and 'all', but it never names messageIds or deleteAll, and it does not explain how they interact, whether deleteAll is required for bulk deletion, or the role of apiKey. This leaves most parameter meaning undocumented.

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 states a clear action ('Deletes messages'), the target resource ('a mailbox'), and two specific modes: by IDs or all messages. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like assistantmail_delete_mailbox by explicitly focusing on messages rather than the mailbox itself.

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 gives no guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites. It only describes what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer appropriate usage from the tool name and sibling list.

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