Delete Forwarder

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true; the description adds the concrete consequence ('Mail sent to the alias is no longer forwarded after deletion'), which tells the agent what is actually lost. It stops short of noting permission requirements or behavior when the alias is missing, but it meaningfully exceeds the annotation coverage.

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?

Three short sentences: purpose first, then effect, then the preparative instruction. No filler and nothing redundant with structured fields.

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 destructive two-parameter tool with an output schema and full annotation coverage, this covers what to pass and what happens. Only secondary details (permissions, not-found behavior) are absent, which is reasonable.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds a genuinely non-obvious constraint: the alias must be passed with its exact stored casing, which the pattern/regex in the schema does not convey. That materially affects correct invocation.

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 and resource ('Deletes an email forwarder by its alias') plus the scope of the effect, which cleanly distinguishes it from create_forwarder and list_forwarders.

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 concrete prerequisite workflow: read the alias's exact stored casing from list_forwarders and pass it unchanged. It doesn't state when not to delete (e.g., alternatives or confirmation expectations), but the actionable context is clear.

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