delete_mail_rule

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and the description adds useful context beyond that: the deletion is permanent and already-imported documents are not affected. This clarifies the scope and side effects without contradicting the 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?

The description is only two sentences, front-loads the destructive warning, and includes no redundant wording. Every clause contributes meaningful information about the operation and its consequences.

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 two-parameter destructive delete with a confirm flag in the schema, the description plus annotations cover the essential behavior, permanence, and non-scope of the operation. It does not explain return values or error cases, but the low complexity and absence of an output schema make this acceptable.

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 50%, with only the confirm parameter documented in the schema. The description implies that id refers to the mail rule to delete, which adds some meaning, but it does not elaborate on how to obtain or validate the id, and confirm semantics are left entirely to the schema. It provides partial but not full compensation for the missing id description.

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 and resource (permanently delete a mail rule) and adds the permanence qualifier, which clearly distinguishes it from update or non-destructive actions. It also isolates the mail-rule resource, separating it from siblings like delete_mail_account.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as update_mail_rule, list_mail_rules, or delete_mail_account. The description implies use for deleting a mail rule but offers no prerequisites, exclusions, or routing context beyond that.

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