Move messages

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

Adds value beyond annotations by describing IMAP asynchronous behavior and confirmation wait. Annotations already indicate non-destructive, so this is additive context.

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?

Extremely concise: two sentences front-loading purpose and adding a key behavioral note. No wasted words.

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?

While output schema exists, the lack of parameter descriptions is a major gap. The tool's behavior (e.g., cross-account moves, failure conditions) is not addressed.

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?

Description provides no parameter details. With 0% schema coverage, the burden is on the description, but it fails to explain any of the 4 parameters (confirm, dry_run_only, message_ids, destination_folder_id).

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 the tool moves messages into another folder, distinguishing it from copy or delete operations. However, it doesn't specify if the move is restricted to the same account or possible across accounts.

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 guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives like mail_copy or mail_delete. The description only mentions IMAP behavior, not usage context.

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