untrash

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) already indicate mutation and non-destructive nature. Description adds critical context: side effects on labels (TRASH removal, INBOX not re-added). No contradiction 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?

Two sentences: first provides core action, second details side effects and follow-up. No superfluous words. Efficient and front-loaded.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values are documented externally. Description covers side effects, usage, and follow-up. With one simple param and clear annotations, the description is fully adequate.

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?

Only one parameter 'threadId' with 0% schema description coverage. Description does not explicitly detail the parameter, but context from 'Restore a thread from Trash' implies its purpose. Adequate for a simple string param, but could be more explicit.

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?

Description clearly states 'Restore a thread from Trash.' verb+resource pair. Distinguishes from sibling tools like 'trash' (opposite action) and 'archive' (different destination).

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?

Explicitly notes side effects: removes TRASH label, preserves user labels, but does NOT re-add INBOX. Recommends using 'modify_labels (add INBOX)' to return to inbox. Provides clear when-to-use and follow-up action.

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