delete_folder

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the confirm gate, which is genuinely useful safety context for a destructive call, but omits whether deletion is permanent, what happens to contained messages, and whether protected folders can be targeted.

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?

Two short sentences, zero filler, with the destructive action stated first and the precondition second. Nothing to trim.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need no explanation. However, for an irreversible mutation with no annotations, the description should at least state irreversibility or the fate of contained messages; the confirm gate alone is a minimum-viable level of completeness.

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 there are 2 parameters. The description explains the confirm parameter's required value, but says nothing about the required name parameter (e.g., whether it takes a path, delimiter, or folder ID), leaving half the surface 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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Delete an IMAP folder") that is immediately distinguishable from siblings like create_folder, rename_folder, and folder_status. It stops short of naming alternatives or scope limits, so it is clear but not maximally differentiated.

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?

"Requires confirm=true" is a real precondition and implicitly signals this is a guarded destructive action, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance, no mention of system folders like INBOX, and no alternative suggested for non-destructive cleanup.

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