chaprola_email_delete

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits on its own. It only states the action 'Delete a specific email' without indicating whether the deletion is permanent, requires authentication, or has side effects (e.g., moving to trash). This is a destructive operation where such details are critical.

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, clear sentence with no filler words. It front-loads the purpose immediately and is appropriately sized for a simple tool.

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 delete tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks behavioral context (permanence, permissions) and usage guidance, which leaves gaps if complexity were higher. Given the low complexity, it barely meets the minimum viable threshold.

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 input schema already describes message_id as 'Message ID to delete' (100% coverage). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so it defaults to the baseline score of 3.

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 uses a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('specific email from your mailbox'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like chaprola_email_read/send/inbox and the generic chaprola_delete_record. It leaves no ambiguity about the operation.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as chaprola_delete_record for non-email records, nor any prerequisites or context. There is no mention of email vs. other resource types or any exclusions.

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