delete_draft

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

Annotations already mark the tool as destructive and not read-only, and the description adds important context beyond them: dry_run defaults to true and performs a non-mutating preview, while dry_run=false causes deletion. It also clarifies that deletion is local, unsent-draft-only, and requires Automation access for Mail.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core action and scope. The dry_run default is emphasized early, and the final safety note about local deletion and permissions is brief and useful.

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 output schema exists, the description does not need to explain return values. It covers the destructive nature, preview behavior, identifier source, and permission requirement, leaving no important operational gap for an agent calling this 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 carry parameter meaning. It does: it explains that id comes from drafts() and gives precise semantics for dry_run, including its default and the behavioral difference between true and false.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Delete one Mail draft by its message-id'. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling draft tools like create_draft or update_mail_status by naming the exact operation and identifier source.

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?

It explains how to select the target ('by its message-id (from drafts())') and how dry_run controls preview versus actual deletion. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or when not to use this one, but the operational context is clear enough for correct invocation.

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