move_email

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=false, so the description adds limited behavioral context beyond the operation being a move. It does not describe side effects, reversibility, or what happens to the original email, but the non-destructive annotation covers the main concern.

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 short sentences with each adding distinct value: action description, usage guidance, and prerequisite hint. No redundant or filler content.

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 simple mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the operation, usage context, and prerequisite. Could optionally mention success indicator or return value, but the information provided suffices for agent decision-making.

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 50%: emailId is described, targetFolder is not. The description mentions 'specified mailbox folder' but does not clarify the required format or path syntax for targetFolder. It recommends get_folders but doesn't explain how to use its output. Baseline 3 is appropriate given partial coverage, but description could add more value.

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 uses specific verb-resource pair 'Move a single email' and specifies the target 'any specified mailbox folder'. It clearly distinguishes from siblings by naming archive_email and trash_email as alternatives for standard folders.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool ('routing a message to a custom folder') and when to prefer alternatives ('archive_email to move to the standard Archive folder, or trash_email to move to Trash'). Also advises prerequisite step 'Use get_folders first to confirm the target folder path.'

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