Mover vários emails

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

Beyond the annotations, which already mark it as non-read-only and non-destructive, the description adds a per-item success/failure report, the 50-item cap, and the crucial note that returned `itens` contain new `id_atual` values that must be used instead of old IDs in subsequent actions. It also clarifies that no email will be deleted, matching the destructiveHint.

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 compact: three sentences with the purpose front-loaded and each sentence providing a distinct operational detail. The included user-facing example adds a little length but supports the workflow requirement.

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 batch mutation tool with no output schema, it covers cap, destination scope, return report format, a helper alternative, and post-move ID semantics. It does not detail behavior for partial failures or inputs exceeding 50, but the report and cap make those reasonably inferable.

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 100%, so the parameters are already well-documented. The description largely repeats the batch limit for `ids` and the destination concept for `pasta_destino`; the valuable `id_atual` note pertains to output behavior rather than input parameter semantics.

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 specific batch operation: moving multiple emails at once (up to 50) to the same destination folder. It clearly distinguishes itself from the singular sibling outlook_mover_email through the plural 'vários' and the explicit batch limit.

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 clear context for when to use the tool: batch-moving up to 50 emails to a common destination, and explicitly suggests using outlook_preparar_acao beforehand. It does not explicitly mention singular alternatives or when not to use it, but the batch scope and helper pointer are enough for an agent to route correctly.

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