delete-label

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that deletion is 'entirely' (destructive) and that system labels are protected. However, it does not detail consequences for emails associated with the label, any confirmation steps, or reversibility. Some behavioral gaps remain.

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 extremely concise with two sentences. The first sentence states the action directly, and the second adds a key constraint. No unnecessary words or redundancy.

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 tool's simplicity (1 parameter, no output schema), the description covers the core purpose and a major constraint. However, it omits details about prerequisites (e.g., permissions) and what happens to associated emails, leaving the agent with moderate uncertainty.

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?

The input schema provides a clear description for 'label_name' ('Name of the label/folder to delete'), achieving 100% coverage. The tool description adds value by stating that system labels cannot be deleted, which constrains valid parameter values beyond 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 action: 'Delete a Gmail label/folder entirely.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'rename-label' or 'create-label' by focusing on deletion. The additional constraint 'Cannot delete system labels' further clarifies scope.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'remove-label' which removes a label from an email). It implies usage for permanently deleting user-created labels, but lacks direct comparison or exclusion criteria.

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