confirm_delete_folder

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It clearly states the destructive nature (permanently deletes folder and all messages), the success response, and error conditions (invalid/expired/used token, folder changed). This is comprehensive disclosure for a mutation tool.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core action, followed by consequences and error conditions. Every sentence adds essential information with no fluff or 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?

The description covers purpose, prerequisites (token from prepare step), behavioral guarantees, and failure modes. It could explicitly say 'call prepare_delete_folder first' but the token reference implies it. No output schema means return-format details are not required.

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 100%, with both token_id and folder_id already documented. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond restating that the token comes from prepare_delete_folder and the folder must match the prepare step, which the schema already notes.

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: to confirm and execute deletion of a mail folder using a token from prepare_delete_folder. This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling confirmation tools like confirm_delete_email and confirm_move_email.

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 clear context by indicating the token comes from prepare_delete_folder, implying this is the second step in a two-phase deletion. It does not explicitly list when-not-to-use or alternatives, but the token requirement makes the usage context unmistakable.

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