move_email

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Move email(s) to folder', which implies a state change but does not disclose side effects, permissions required, reversibility, or whether the original email is deleted or kept. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 zero wasted words. It is appropriately short for a simple tool and provides the essential action in a clear, front-loaded manner.

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 tool has no annotations, no output schema, and a very terse description. For a mutation operation, the absence of any details about behavior, return values, or constraints makes the context incomplete. The description does not compensate for the missing structured metadata.

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 already has high coverage (100%) with descriptions for both parameters ('Email UIDs' and 'Destination folder'). The description adds no further meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 'Move email(s) to folder' clearly states the action (move) and the resource (emails) with a destination. It is specific and unambiguous, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like switch_folder, which is a similar concept but for changing the active folder rather than moving messages.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It simply states the action without mentioning prerequisites, exclusions, or situations where another tool might be more appropriate. There is no 'when to use' context beyond the obvious inference from the tool name.

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