combell_mailboxes_delete

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

The description explicitly states 'SIDE EFFECT: irreversible', which adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the annotations. The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, but the description reinforces the permanence and specifies that all e-mail is deleted, not just the mailbox. This is valuable context for an agent deciding whether to invoke the 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?

The description is two short sentences with zero waste. The core action is front-loaded, and the critical side effect is stated immediately after. Every word 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 single-parameter delete tool with destructiveHint=true in annotations and a clear side-effect warning in the description, the context is largely complete. The only minor gap is that it doesn't describe the return value or confirmation behavior, but with no output schema and a simple delete operation, this is not a significant omission.

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%, so the schema already documents the single parameter (mailbox_name) as 'The mailbox e-mail address to delete'. The description does not add additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, but the baseline of 3 is appropriate given full schema coverage.

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 states a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('a mailbox and all its e-mail'), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like combell_mailboxes_get or combell_mailboxes_create. It does not explicitly name a sibling alternative, but the resource and action are unambiguous.

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?

The description implies when to use the tool: when a mailbox and all its e-mail need to be permanently removed. It does not provide explicit exclusions or alternatives, but the destructive nature is clearly flagged, which serves as a cautionary usage guideline. No explicit 'when not to use' is given.

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