delete_email

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description adds critical behavioral context: 'Permanently delete', 'Irreversible', and 'via IMAP expunge' reveal the actual deletion mechanism. This clearly signals that the action cannot be undone, going beyond the annotation's generic destructiveness.

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 highly concise and front-loaded: the first sentence states the core purpose, followed by tightly worded usage guidelines and the final 'Irreversible' warning. Every sentence earns its place without redundancy.

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 tool's moderate complexity (2 params, no output schema), the description covers purpose, usage timing, alternatives, and irreversibility. Combined with the complete schema, the agent has all necessary context to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 fully documents both parameters with detailed descriptions, including the composite format for emailId and the confirmation requirement for confirmed. The tool description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('delete'), resource ('a single email'), and method ('via IMAP expunge'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explicitly naming alternatives like trash_email, bulk_delete, and delete_thread.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool: 'Use only when certain the message is no longer needed' and directly recommends alternatives: 'Prefer trash_email if recovery may be required', 'Prefer bulk_delete to delete multiple emails at once', and 'Prefer delete_thread to delete all messages in a conversation.'

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