Mover mensajes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true, so safety profile is covered. The description adds one useful behavioral fact — the destination must pre-exist — but says nothing about what happens to the source copies, partial failure on the 50-UID cap, or what is returned.

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?

Two short sentences, zero filler, with the core action front-loaded and the prerequisite/alternative trailing. Every sentence 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?

For a 3-parameter, all-required mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the operation and its key precondition. It omits error/partial-failure behavior and result reporting, but the essential call requirements are present.

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 coverage is 67%: uids and mailbox carry their own descriptions (including the valuable 'UID de IMAP, no el número de secuencia' note), while destination only has a $ref. The description reinforces UID semantics and the existence requirement for destination but adds little beyond the schema, matching the baseline 3.

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 specific verb (mover) plus resource (mensajes) and scope (por UID, de una carpeta a otra), which cleanly separates it from delete_messages, set_flags, and search_messages among the siblings. An agent knows exactly what operation this performs.

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?

Gives a clear precondition (the destination folder must already exist) and routes the agent to a specific sibling (create_mailbox) to satisfy it. It does not state when to prefer this over alternatives like delete_messages or copy, so it falls short of full when/when-not guidance.

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