Déplacer un mail

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses the action is reversible, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not mention what happens if the folder doesn’t exist, permissions needed, or other side effects, making it moderately transparent.

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 two concise sentences with zero wasted words. The key action and constraint are front-loaded, making it easy to parse.

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?

The description covers the basic move operation and reversibility, but it does not differentiate from the sibling corbeille_mail (trash) nor explain what constitutes a valid folder or error behavior. Given the simple tool, it is marginally adequate but could be more complete.

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 100% (both parameters have descriptions). The description adds no new semantic info beyond emphasizing exact folder name, which is already in the schema. Baseline 3 is 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 'Déplace un mail vers un dossier' (verb + resource) and specifies the exact folder name requirement, distinguishing it from sibling tools like corbeille_mail (which likely moves to trash). The purpose is unambiguous.

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 guidance on usage by stating the folder name must be exact as it appears in Mail, and notes the action is reversible. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools or state when to avoid using this tool.

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