Delete Forwarder

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

The destructiveHint annotation already flags the destructive nature of the action, and the description aligns with it. However, the description adds no extra behavioral context beyond the verb 'delete', such as irreversibility, confirmation requirements, or what happens to associated settings. With the annotation present, this is minimally adequate.

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 a single four-word sentence that states the action and target directly, with no filler or repetition. It is perfectly front-loaded and uses every word effectively.

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 simple one-parameter delete operation, the description covers the essential behavior and the schema supplies the parameter details. The destructiveHint annotation covers the safety context, and with no output schema, no return value explanation is needed. It could be slightly more explicit about permanence, but it is largely complete.

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 the sole parameter forwarder_id with its type and description, achieving 100% schema coverage. The tool description adds no additional semantic meaning to the parameter, so it relies entirely on the schema, which is acceptable and warrants the baseline score.

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 the specific verb 'Delete' and the resource 'email forwarder', clearly distinguishing it from sibling deletion tools like mail_mailboxes_delete and mail_aliases_delete. The noun phrase unambiguously identifies the target entity, making the purpose immediately clear.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as mail_forwarders_list or mail_forwarders_create. It doesn't mention prerequisites, exclusions, or related tools, leaving the agent without context for selection among the many mail-related tools.

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