bulk_update_flags

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

Annotations only include destructiveHint: false. The description adds crucial behavioral information: the server may silently drop flags and the tool returns notApplied[] per message. This goes beyond annotations.

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 sentences, no filler. Every sentence adds value: first states core function, second clarifies input modes and return behavior.

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?

With 7 parameters, no required ones, no output schema, and high schema coverage, the description covers the key behavioral aspects (XOR, notApplied) and is fairly complete. Lacks explanation of dryRun and maxBatchSize, but those are well-described in schema.

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 high (86%), so baseline is 3. The description adds the XOR relationship between emailIds and match+folder, which is not explicit in the schema, but does not add much detail to individual parameters beyond what they already have.

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 specifies the action (add/remove IMAP flags), the resource (multiple messages), and distinguishes from siblings by highlighting bulk operation and XOR condition between emailIds and match+folder. It also mentions the return of notApplied[] for silently dropped flags.

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?

Explicitly states the XOR condition between emailIds and match+folder, providing clear guidance on when to use each input mode. Does not explicitly list when not to use the tool or mention alternatives, but the XOR guidance is strong.

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