sendook_delete_inbox

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

Annotations already provide destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral context: it revokes sending access, archives all historical messages, and the address stops receiving messages. It does not contradict annotations. It could mention if the action is reversible or what happens to archived messages, but overall strong.

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 efficient: a short purpose statement, a warning in all caps, and clearly labeled Args/Returns sections. Every sentence adds value, no fluff.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, clear action), the description is nearly complete. It covers the action, consequences, parameter, and return type. It could optionally mention idempotency (implied by delete) or error handling, but these are not critical gaps.

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 description repeats the parameter 'inbox_id' as 'the inbox identifier to delete' but adds no meaning beyond the schema, which already provides a description and example. Schema description coverage is considered 0% per context, but the schema itself has a description. With minimal addition, 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 'Delete an inbox and archive its messages' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like sendook_get_inbox and sendook_create_inbox by focusing on deletion, and includes a warning about consequences, leaving no ambiguity.

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 includes a warning that revoking sending access and archiving messages makes this action permanent, implying when to use (when you want to permanently remove an inbox). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or compare with alternatives like a disable option, but given no such sibling exists, it's nearly complete.

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