delete_label

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly discloses that deleting a label does not delete the emails carrying it, which is a key behavioral detail. However, it lacks information on permissions, reversibility, or side effects like cascading effects on filters.

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 two sentences with no waste. It front-loads important context ('Multi-account Gmail') and then states the action and key nuance. Every word earns its place.

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 has two required parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core behavior. However, it does not mention prerequisites (e.g., label must exist) or return values. It is adequate for a simple tool but leaves some 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?

Schema description coverage is 50% (account has a good description, labelId lacks one). The tool description does not provide any additional details for 'labelId' beyond the schema. Since coverage is moderate, the description should compensate but does not add meaning for the undocumented parameter.

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 explicitly states 'Delete a label' which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'create_label' and 'update_label' by clearly indicating it is a deletion operation. The additional clarification that it does not delete emails carrying the label provides precise scope.

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 context about multi-account Gmail but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies usage when a label needs to be removed, but no 'when not to use' or comparison with related tools like 'trash_message' is given.

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