batch_trash_emails

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It conveys that the operation moves emails to trash rather than permanently deleting them and that it operates in batches, but it omits side effects such as reversibility, permission requirements, and whether failures are per-message or all-or-nothing.

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 short sentence with no filler; every word carries meaning. It is efficiently structured and immediately communicates the action, target, and batch scope.

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 two-parameter tool with a fully described schema and an output schema, the core operation is understandable. However, the absence of annotations and lack of sibling differentiation leave gaps around recoverability, error behavior, and when this tool should be chosen over alternatives.

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 already covers both parameters: message_ids is 'List of message IDs to trash' and batch_size is 'Number of messages per batch (default: 50)'. The description adds little meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 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 uses a specific verb ('Move') plus resource ('emails'), destination ('to trash'), and scope ('multiple', 'in batches'), so an agent can tell this apart from singular trash_email and from batch_delete_emails (which deletes rather than trashes). It clearly states what the tool does.

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 implies bulk use ('multiple emails', 'in batches'), but it does not explicitly tell the agent when to prefer this tool over trash_email, batch_delete_emails, or batch_move. Usage guidance is left to inference from sibling tool names rather than stated.

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