delete_email

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Critical omission: fails to disclose whether deletion is permanent or moves to trash (empty_trash sibling implies trash exists), whether the operation is reversible, or error behavior when UID doesn't exist.

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 terse (3 words) which prevents waste, but for a destructive operation this is insufficiently front-loaded with safety warnings or behavioral context. The brevity costs necessary information density.

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?

Inadequate for a destructive operation with no output schema. Missing critical safety context: no explanation of trash vs. permanent deletion, no return value description, and no error handling guidance despite the irreversible nature of the action.

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 has 100% description coverage (uid, mailbox), so baseline is adequate. Description implies single-item operation matching the uid parameter, but adds no syntax details, format examples, or behavioral context beyond what the schema provides.

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 specific verb (Delete) and resource (email), and distinguishes from bulk_delete/bulk_delete_by_sender siblings by specifying 'single'. However, it does not differentiate from delete_older_than or clarify the deletion mechanism (permanent vs. trash) despite empty_trash being a sibling.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this versus bulk_delete for multiple emails, or versus delete_older_than for cleanup. No mention of prerequisites like email existence or mailbox selection strategy.

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