archive

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only states 'removes it from the Inbox' but does not disclose where the message goes (archive folder), whether the action is reversible, required permissions, or side effects on labels or read status.

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 sentence, but it is too minimal given the tool's complexity. It front-loads the action but omits necessary details, making it under-specified.

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 no output schema, three parameters, and no annotations, the description is inadequate. It lacks explanation of return values, parameter meanings, and full behavioral context for a mutation tool.

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%, so the description must explain all three parameters. It only mentions 'message' implicitly but does not explain 'account' or 'password', leaving them undocumented.

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 verb 'Archive' and the resource 'a message', with a parenthetical clarification that it removes from Inbox. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like 'trash_message' which also removes from Inbox but to a 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., trash_message, mark_read). There is no context about prerequisites or scenarios.

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