bulk_delete

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

Annotations only declare destructiveHint: true, so the description carries the burden of detailing behavior. It adds that permanent:true expunges irreversibly, false moves to Trash, and dryRun previews the action. It also hints at the confirmation requirement via the schema, but the description itself mentions the destructive side effect beyond the annotation.

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?

Three tight sentences with zero filler. The main purpose is front-loaded, followed by routing guidance, then mode-specific behavior. Every sentence earns its place.

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 7 parameters, nested objects, and no output schema, the description covers the critical operational aspects: modes (IDs vs. match), destructive behavior, preview, and boundary conditions against siblings. It omits maxBatchSize and confirmed details, but the schema covers these and the description focuses on what an agent must know to choose and call the 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 coverage is 86%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds key semantic value by clarifying the XOR relationship between emailIds and match criteria, explaining permanent vs. trash behavior, and noting dryRun as a preview. This goes beyond the schema's parameter descriptions.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Delete multiple emails by explicit ID list or by search criteria'. It further distinguishes itself from siblings by naming empty_folder, delete_email, and batch_email_action as alternatives, making the tool's unique scope unambiguous.

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 explicitly provides when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance: 'Prefer empty_folder to clear an entire folder', 'Prefer delete_email for a single message', 'Prefer batch_email_action when the same set of IDs needs a mix of actions'. It also states the ideal use case: specific IDs or filtering by sender, subject, or date range.

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