mark_unread

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

The description discloses the behavioral trait of removing the \Seen flag, which is a key effect. However, with no annotations provided, it does not mention permissions, idempotency, or what happens if the email is already unread. It is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 extremely concise: one sentence of 9 words. Every word is necessary and there is no redundancy. It is perfectly front-loaded with the action.

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 low complexity (2 required parameters, no output schema), the description is minimally complete. It states the core functionality but omits usage context, parameter details, and behavioral constraints. It meets a basic standard but leaves gaps for an AI agent.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must explain the parameters but does not. It adds no meaning beyond the schema. The parameters 'folder' and 'email_id' are not described, leaving their format or constraints unclear.

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 action: 'Mark an email as unread (removes \Seen).' It specifies the verb (mark) and resource (email), and differentiates from sibling tools like mark_read and mark_flagged by mentioning the removal of the \Seen flag.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as mark_read, mark_flagged, or bulk_mark_unread. The description lacks context about prerequisites or typical use cases.

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