emails_batch_archive

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool archives/deletes emails, indicating a destructive mutation, but lacks details on permissions required, whether deletion is permanent or reversible, rate limits, or response format. This is inadequate for a destructive operation with zero annotation coverage.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action and scope without unnecessary words. Every part of the sentence contributes directly to understanding the tool's function.

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 batch operation with no annotations, 0% schema description coverage, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't address critical aspects like error handling, confirmation requirements, or what happens to archived emails, leaving significant gaps for safe agent invocation.

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%, so the description must compensate. It implies 'emailIds' parameter by mentioning 'multiple email records', but doesn't specify format, constraints, or valid values. The description adds minimal semantic context beyond the schema's structural definition.

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 ('multiple email records') with the scope 'in a single request'. It distinguishes from the singular 'emails_archive' sibling by specifying batch operation, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with other email tools like 'emails_batch_create'.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'emails_archive' (for single emails) or other batch operations. The description implies batch processing but doesn't specify prerequisites, constraints, or comparative scenarios with sibling tools.

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