gmail_createLabel

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only repeats the action 'Create a new Gmail label' without disclosing behaviors such as duplicate handling, permissions, side effects, or response format.

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 sentence with no filler words, making it highly concise and front-loaded.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description is too minimal to cover important context like return value, error conditions, or behavior when a label with the same name exists. The schema covers parameters but not overall tool behavior.

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?

The input schema provides detailed descriptions for all three parameters (name, labelListVisibility, messageListVisibility) with defaults, so the description adds no additional parameter semantics. Baseline 3 applies due to high schema coverage.

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 the specific verb 'Create' and identifies the resource as 'Gmail label', clearly distinguishing from sibling tools like gmail_listLabels or gmail_modify.

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 provides no explicit or implicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It simply states the action without any context about scenarios, prerequisites, or when not to use it.

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