deleteEmailsById

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose one meaningful side effect: deleting emails invalidates the current order of IDs. However, it omits whether deletion is permanent/recoverable, whether it requires specific permissions, batch size limits, or failure behavior for invalid IDs.

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?

Two short sentences plus a brief Args block, with the core action front-loaded and the caveat immediately after. Slightly verbose in restating the parameter, but no wasted text.

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 destructive one-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the action, the parameter type, and one important side effect, but leaves out permanence, error handling, and where valid IDs originate.

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 single parameter is an untyped array (items: {}), so the schema provides almost nothing. The description partially compensates by stating ids is 'a list of integer based message IDs', but gives no format, source, or constraints on those IDs.

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?

States a specific verb+resource (deletes emails) and constrains scope to emails 'currently in the inbox' by ID. It is distinguishable from siblings like getEmailsById and pollEmails, though it never names them explicitly.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus getEmailsById or the send tools, and no prerequisites, authorization notes, or preconditions (e.g. that IDs should come from a prior get/poll call) are given.

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