delete_filter

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 only states 'Delete' without indicating whether the operation is permanent, whether special permissions are required, or what side effects may occur.

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 one sentence with zero wasted words, directly stating the action and resource. It is optimally concise for the tool's simplicity.

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 single-parameter delete operation, the essential invocation details are present and an output schema exists, so return values need not be described. However, the absence of usage guidance and behavioral transparency leaves the description adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and the filter_id parameter is clearly documented as 'ID of the filter to delete', so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional semantic detail about the parameter or how to source a valid ID.

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 states a clear verb ('Delete') and a specific resource ('Gmail filter'), leaving no ambiguity about the tool's function. It distinguishes itself from siblings like create_filter, get_filter, list_filters, and delete_label by naming a unique action-object combination.

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 create_filter, get_filter, or delete_label. It also omits prerequisites like obtaining a valid filter_id from list_filters or any conditions that should precede deletion.

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