prepare_batch_move_emails

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses key behaviors: it returns per-email tokens, defers execution to a later confirmation step, errors if any email or folder doesn't exist, and tokens expire after 5 minutes. This gives the agent a solid understanding of the tool's side effects and constraints.

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 three short sentences, each adding a distinct piece of information: the operation, the workflow, and the error/expiry behavior. It is front-loaded and contains no filler.

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?

Despite having no output schema or annotations, the description is complete for a two-phase operation. It covers the workflow, return tokens, validation errors, and token expiration, enabling the agent to sequence the operation 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 schema already provides detailed descriptions for both parameters, referencing source tools like list_emails and list_folders, so baseline 3 applies. The description adds the 50-email limit and error condition but doesn't alter the parameter meanings.

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 prepares a batch move of multiple emails (up to 50) to a destination folder, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from single-email move tools and the confirm step by describing the two-phase approval token workflow.

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 explains the workflow by instructing to call confirm_batch_operation with the returned tokens, providing clear context on when this tool is used. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives like prepare_move_email, but the batch focus (up to 50) makes the usage context clear.

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