archive_emails

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: dry_run mode, only_read filtering, max_archive cap, and the return summary. It covers safety and constraints comprehensively.

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 well-structured with a clear main action, safety features list, and parameter list. It is slightly verbose but every sentence adds value. The front-loading of the main action aids quick understanding.

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 complexity (9 parameters, no annotations, output schema exists), the description covers all necessary details: parameter meanings, safety constraints, defaults, and return type. It is fully complete for an agent to use 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 input schema has 0% description coverage (no property descriptions), so the tool's parameter descriptions add crucial meaning beyond schema titles. Each parameter is explained with purpose and defaults, fully compensating for the schema gap.

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 ('archive emails by moving them to an Archive mailbox') and includes safety features. However, it does not explicitly differentiate this tool from siblings like bulk_move_emails or move_email, which have similar actions.

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 implicit usage guidance through safety features (required filter, dry_run, only_read defaults) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives. It could be improved by contrasting with sibling tools.

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