bulk_email_action

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It lists supported actions but omits critical details such as whether delete is soft (trash) or permanent, partial failure handling, rate limits, or authorization requirements. The schema mentions permanent_delete, but the description does not clarify this distinction.

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 concise, two sentences long, and front-loaded with the core purpose ('Perform an action on multiple emails at once'). Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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 bulk mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, this description is underspecified. It lacks usage context, edge-case behavior, response expectations, and clear differentiation from similar sibling tools. The schema covers parameters, but the description still leaves significant gaps for an agent to confidently invoke the tool.

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 schema already thoroughly documents the parameters (emailIds, action, mailboxId). The description adds no extra parameter-level meaning beyond the action types already present in the schema, making the baseline of 3 appropriate.

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 clearly states it is a bulk email action tool, enumerating supported operations (mark read/unread, flagging/unflagging, moving, deleting). The phrase 'at once' differentiates it from single-email siblings like move_email or delete_email, giving it a distinct purpose.

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 implies use for batch operations with 'at once', but it does not explicitly contrast with single-email alternatives or state when not to use this tool. No alternatives are referenced, leaving the usage guidance somewhat implicit.

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