delete_mailbox

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the destructive effect (deletes the mailbox and all its messages) and adds the provider-support caveat. It doesn't mention irreversibility, permissions, or what happens when a provider doesn't support it, but it covers the core risk.

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?

A single sentence with the core action first, followed by the scope and a qualifying caveat. Every word earns its place; no padding.

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 one-parameter destructive operation, the description covers what is deleted, the parameter, and a conditional limitation. Without an output schema or annotations, it might have noted provider-detection or error behavior, but the essential guidance for a correct call is present.

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 only parameter, address, is already described as 'The temporary email address to delete.' The description adds no further parameter detail, so it meets the baseline but doesn't enrich beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('temporary mailbox') and adds the scope of the action (messages). It is clearly distinct from all siblings, none of which are deletions, so an agent can select it unambiguously.

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 makes the use case apparent: clean up a temporary mailbox and its messages. It doesn't explicitly say 'use when done with the mailbox' or list alternatives, but no sibling provides a deletion operation, so the when-to-use context is clear enough.

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