trash_message

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=false and idempotentHint=true, but that leaves reversibility ambiguous; the description resolves this by labeling the operation a soft delete, implying recovery is possible. It doesn't mention that a sibling (untrash_message) reverses it, which would have closed the loop.

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 with the operation and the default-selection rule front-loaded; nothing is redundant.

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 single-parameter, non-destructive mutation with no output schema, this covers what it does and when to prefer it. Missing only the reversible counterpart and any note on where the message ID comes from.

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 0% and the single parameter messageId is never described or formatted. 'A message' weakly implies the target, but the description adds no syntax, format, or ID-source guidance beyond the schema's bare string type.

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 ('Moves a message to Trash') plus the soft-delete semantics. It does not explicitly contrast with the sibling trash_thread, though 'message' vs 'thread' is implied by the name.

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?

Explicitly declares this the default tool when the user asks to delete without requesting permanent deletion, which is a clear selection rule. It stops short of naming the permanent-delete alternative, leaving the agent to infer which tool that is.

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