Remove a disposable email inbox and permanently delete all its emails to free up resources and stop receiving messages.
Delete an inbox and all its emails.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| inbox_id | Yes | The inbox ID to delete |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description discloses that deletion cascades to all emails, which is a critical behavioral trait. However, it omits other behavioral aspects like idempotency, error handling, or permission requirements. With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden.
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 a single, focused sentence that immediately conveys the purpose. It is front-loaded and contains no redundant information.
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 simple deletion tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is mostly complete, specifying both the primary action and the cascading effect. It lacks details on return values or error states, but the core functionality is adequately covered.
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 100%, with the 'inbox_id' parameter already well-documented. The description adds no extra semantic value beyond the schema's 'The inbox ID to delete', so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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) and the resource (inbox), and explicitly mentions the cascading effect on emails, distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_inbox or list_inboxes.
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?
No guidance is provided on when to use or not use this tool, nor any mention of prerequisites or alternatives. The description only states the action without contextual usage advice.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.