Move Email to Trash

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

The description discloses critical behavioral details beyond the annotations: labels are lost when moving (label copies not preserved) and the tool requires explicit confirmation. Since annotations already mark it as destructive, this additional context about label behavior and the confirmation requirement provides valuable transparency for the agent.

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 extremely concise, consisting of only three sentences that are front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds value: the first states the function, the second explains it is a wrapper, and the third provides essential behavioral notes. No redundant or extraneous text.

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 the presence of an output schema and annotations, the description covers the key aspects: purpose, label loss behavior, and confirmation requirement. It is sufficient for correct invocation, though it could be slightly enhanced by noting that trashing is reversible (e.g., can be undone from Trash).

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?

The schema description coverage is 75%, so the schema already documents most parameters. The description adds only a reference to the confirmed parameter (mentioning the requirement), but does not elaborate on emailId, account_id, or sourceFolder beyond what the schema provides. This meets the baseline but does not add significant extra meaning.

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 'Move an email to the Trash folder' and identifies itself as a 'Convenience wrapper for move_email targeting Trash', which clearly specifies the verb and resource while distinguishing it from the general move_email tool. This is highly specific and leaves no ambiguity about the tool's purpose.

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 that this tool should be used when moving an email to Trash (as opposed to other destinations) and notes the requirement for confirmation ('requires { confirmed: true }'). However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare it to alternatives like delete_email or archive_email, which would provide stronger guidance.

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