delete_label

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does provide one useful side effect: deleting a label removes the Labels/<name> folder. However, it does not mention whether the operation is irreversible, whether messages with the label are affected, or any permission or error conditions, leaving relevant destructive-operation context undisclosed.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. Both the core action and a valuable clarifying side effect are included; every word earns its place.

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 destructive tool with no annotations, this description is too thin. It omits usage guidance, distinction from remove_label, and the effect on existing messages/emails that carry the label. The presence of an output schema covers return values, but the operational context remains incomplete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that `name` is the label name corresponding to the Labels/<name> folder, but gives no explanation of the `account` parameter, its default, or how it selects the account. Thus only partial compensation is achieved.

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 specifies the action (Delete) and the resource (ProtonMail label), and adds a concrete detail (removes the Labels/<name> folder). It does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling remove_label, which could be a distinct operation, so it falls short of a 5.

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 indication of when this tool should be used versus alternatives like remove_label or add_label, nor any stated conditions or exclusions. The description only states the action.

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