emails_archive

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the action ('Archive (delete)') without detailing behavioral traits. It doesn't specify if the action is reversible, what permissions are required, if there are rate limits, or what happens to associated data, leaving significant gaps for a destructive operation.

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 with a single, front-loaded sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. Every part of the sentence earns its place by specifying the action and resource.

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 destructive tool with no annotations, 0% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks crucial details like error handling, return values, side effects, or usage context, making it inadequate for safe and effective use by an AI agent.

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 0%, but the description doesn't add any parameter information beyond what the schema implies (emailId is required). It doesn't explain what emailId represents, its format, or where to obtain it, resulting in minimal added value.

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 (delete)') and resource ('an email record'), making the purpose unambiguous. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like emails_batch_archive or other archive tools for different resources, which prevents a perfect score.

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 this tool versus alternatives like emails_batch_archive or other deletion methods. The description lacks context about prerequisites, permissions, or specific scenarios for application.

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