delete_label

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'delete' without mentioning irreversibility, side effects (e.g., label removal from all messages), required permissions, or error conditions.

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 (4 words) but at the cost of missing important context. It is front-loaded, but the brevity limits its utility. A slightly longer description with key behavioral notes would be more effective.

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?

The tool is simple, but the description fails to mention return values (e.g., success message, void), errors (e.g., when deleting a system label), or that deleting a label also removes it from all messages. Without annotations, the description is incomplete.

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 coverage is 100% for the single parameter 'id', and the description does not add meaning beyond the schema's 'Label ID to delete'. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already conveys the parameter's purpose.

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 (delete) and resource (Gmail label). It is unambiguous and distinguishes from sibling tools like delete_email. However, it could be more specific by noting that only user-created labels are deletable, not system labels.

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 information is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., update_label to hide a label) or when not to use it (e.g., system labels cannot be deleted). The agent receives no guidance on prerequisites or context.

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