Move email to trash

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

Annotations already mark the tool as destructive, readOnly=false, and non-idempotent. The description adds important context beyond those flags: the action is a move to Trash, not a permanent deletion, and the target is the account's configured Trash folder. This clarifies the practical effect of the destructive operation.

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 no filler. The primary action is front-loaded, and the key non-permanence clarification immediately follows. Every sentence contributes useful information.

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 mutation with annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior and non-destructive-to-permanence distinction. It could be slightly more complete by naming sibling tools for alternative destinations, but the core invocation context is adequate.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description does not explicitly document messageId semantics or format. However, the phrase 'one message' plus the self-explanatory parameter name 'messageId' make the intended parameter role reasonably clear. The schema also provides length constraints.

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 verb ('move'), a specific resource ('one message'), and a specific destination ('the account's configured Trash folder'). It also explicitly distinguishes the operation from permanent deletion, which separates it from the sibling mail_delete_permanently.

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 clearly indicates when to use the tool: to trash a single message. It also says what the tool does not do ('does not permanently delete'), which helps rule out mail_delete_permanently. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools like mail_move for moving to a non-Trash folder.

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