delete_email

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true. The description adds critical behavioral details: default behavior (move to Trash), permanent deletion option, and the requirement that the mailbox be a real folder. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

Four sentences, each necessary. Front-loaded with the primary action, followed by defaults, options, and a specific usage caveat. 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?

Given the action (delete) and the presence of annotations, the description sufficiently covers behavior and prerequisites. Lacks explicit mention of return value, but for a delete operation this is often trivial. Still, a slight gap for full completeness.

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%. The description adds value by explaining the effect of the `permanent` parameter (irreversible) and the context for `mailbox` (must be a real folder). It does not elaborate on `account` or `emailId`, but those are self-explanatory from the schema.

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 tool deletes an email, distinguishes between moving to Trash (default) and permanent deletion, and uses specific verbs and resource. It effectively differentiates from sibling tools like send, reply, move, and mark.

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 explicitly advises when to use `find_email_folder` first for emails in virtual folders, and warns about the irreversibility of permanent deletion. This provides clear usage context and alternatives.

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