move_to_inbox

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It only states the core action but fails to mention side effects, authentication needs (e.g., password parameter), or what happens to existing labels. The tool moves a message, but impact on threading or timestamps is not mentioned.

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 sentence, front-loading the purpose efficiently. It avoids verbosity but could include more context without being excessive. It is concise but not at the expense of completeness.

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 tool with three parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It lacks details on return values, error conditions, required authentication, and edge cases. The minimal information leaves the agent guessing critical usage aspects.

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 has three parameters (message_id, account, password) with 0% schema description coverage. The description does not explain any parameter's meaning or constraints. While parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, the description adds no value beyond the schema's titles.

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 'Move a message back to the Inbox' uses a specific verb-adjective-noun structure that clearly indicates the action (moving) and target (message to Inbox). It distinguishes from sibling tools like archive (archives message) and trash_message (moves to trash).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like archive or label_message. It does not mention prerequisites, such as whether the message must be archived or trashed first, or when moving back is appropriate.

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