hide_thread

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the destructive nature is covered by structured data. The description adds nothing beyond that – it doesn't clarify whether the thread is removed permanently, hidden only from inbox, or recoverable, which matters given the ambiguous 'Hide/delete' wording and an output schema that is never referenced.

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?

Very short and front-loaded with the action, though the awkward 'Args:' block restates the single parameter with no added value and the slash verb introduces ambiguity rather than structure.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be explained, but for a destructive mutation with a crowded sibling set the description should distinguish hide from delete and from mute_thread. It leaves the key behavioral question (what actually happens to the thread) unanswered.

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 0% and the only description of thread_id is the tautological 'ID of the thread to hide.' No format, source, or expected value information is added beyond the schema's own field name.

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?

States a verb+resource ('Hide/delete a thread from inbox'), so purpose is identifiable. However, it conflates two distinct operations (hide vs delete) with a slash, leaving ambiguity about actual effect, and does not differentiate from siblings like mute_thread or unmute_thread.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as mute_thread (which hides notifications without removing) despite a crowded sibling set. The agent must infer when hiding is appropriate.

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