move_email

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only restates the action implied by the name. It does not mention whether the original email is removed from the source folder, whether the operation is reversible, what permissions are needed, or how destination failures are handled.

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 concise, front-loaded sentence with no redundant phrasing. While it is brief, it is not padded and delivers the core action directly.

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 mutating tool with no annotations, the description is too sparse. Even though an output schema reportedly exists, the description lacks essential context about prerequisites, behavior on failure, source mailbox handling, and parameter relationships.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description mentions no parameter details. The agent must infer the meaning and usage of uid, account, mailbox, and destination solely from their names, with no compensation for the schema gap.

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 ('Move') and resource ('email to another folder'), clearly indicating a folder-relocation operation. It is unambiguous about the core action, though it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like add_label or mark_email.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use move_email versus alternatives such as delete_email, add_label, or the send/reply/forward tools. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or context clues about when this tool is the right choice.

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