imap_bulk_delete

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It usefully explains chunking, batch processing, and auto-reconnection to prevent timeouts. However, it does not mention that deletions are likely permanent or how IMAP delete/expunge behavior works, leaving important side effects undisclosed.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the core action and key behaviors. The second sentence justifies the batching mechanism in one clause; no filler or irrelevant detail is present.

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 schema plus description is sufficient to make a basic call, but the definition lacks guidance on destructive consequences and how this differs from imap_bulk_delete_by_search. For a bulk mutation tool with no annotations, that is a notable gap.

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 documents all five parameters. The description adds only minor context about batching, which aligns with chunkSize, but does not add meaningful parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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 operation: deleting multiple emails at once, with batching and auto-reconnection. It is clearly distinct from single-email deletion, though it does not explicitly contrast with imap_bulk_delete_by_search or imap_delete_email.

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?

There is no guidance about when to prefer this tool over imap_delete_email or imap_bulk_delete_by_search, nor any mention of when not to use it. The only implied usage is 'bulk deletes', which is not enough to route an agent confidently among sibling tools.

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