gmail_delete_filter

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the destructive nature ('Delete'), the required settings scope, and the confirmation safety gate. However, it does not state whether deletion is permanent or if any consequences apply beyond the filter itself, but the mention of scope and confirmation is substantial for a delete tool.

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 sentences with no wasted words. The core action and prerequisite are front-loaded, and the safety and auth notes are concise.

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's simplicity and lack of output schema, the description covers the necessary context: what it does, how to find the ID, the required scope, and the mandatory confirmation. It is complete for safe invocation.

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 descriptions cover all three parameters at 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds some value by advising to use gmail_list_filters to obtain filterId, and it reinforces the safety gate for confirm, but it does not add significant new meaning beyond the schema.

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 action ('Delete'), the resource ('Gmail filter'), and the identifier ('by ID'). It distinguishes from siblings like gmail_create_filter and gmail_list_filters by specifying deletion.

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?

It explicitly tells the user to use gmail_list_filters to see existing filters, which is a helpful prerequisite and alternative. It also mentions the confirmation requirement, but does not explicitly state when not to use it, though the context implies the need for an existing filter ID.

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