delete_email

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully indicates this is a soft delete (move to Trash) rather than permanent deletion, and notes provider naming differences. However, it does not disclose reversibility, permissions, or effects on related messages/threads, leaving significant gaps.

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 concise sentence that accurately and efficiently conveys the core action and destination. No redundant or filler content.

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?

For a simple one-parameter tool with complete schema coverage, the description adequately conveys the operation. Missing details like reversibility and lack of output schema prevent a perfect score, but the core purpose is fully covered.

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 single parameter message_ref is fully described in the schema as a 'Composite message reference from list_emails or search_emails', giving 100% coverage. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning, so baseline 3 applies.

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 moves an email to the Trash, specifying provider-specific terminology (iCloud Deleted Messages, Gmail Trash). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like archive_email and move_email, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 delete_email versus alternatives such as archive_email, move_to_junk, or move_email. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or context signals for selection.

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