Bulk Remove Label from Emails

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

The description reveals that the operation is non-destructive to emails (they remain in folders) and highlights the UID space nuance. This adds valuable context beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false). No contradictions.

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 concise with two focused sentences. Each sentence serves a purpose: first states the action, second provides critical behavioral details. No unnecessary words.

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 presence of an output schema and the straightforward nature of the tool (removing a label from emails), the description covers the key caveat (UID spaces) and the effect. The parameter descriptions in the schema are also complete, making the overall definition comprehensive.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explaining why emailIds must be from the label folder, reinforcing the schema's description. It also clarifies that the operation does not affect original folders.

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 (remove a label from multiple emails) and specifies the effect (emails remain in original folders). It also provides a critical distinction from siblings by explaining the UID space uniqueness.

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 gives explicit guidance that UIDs must come from Labels/{label} and warns that using INBOX UIDs will silently miss. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool versus alternatives like remove_label, but the context is strong.

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