Mariana Google MCP

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full disclosure burden. It successfully clarifies the soft-delete semantics (label-based, reversible, distinct from Gmail's trash mechanism) and manages expectations about message safety. It could improve by stating whether the 'To Be Deleted' label is auto-created or must exist.

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?

Two sentences with zero waste. The first sentence front-loads the core mechanism (soft-delete via label movement). The second sentence delivers a critical safety constraint. Every word earns its place.

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 2-parameter tool without output schema, the description adequately covers the essential non-obvious behavior (soft vs hard deletion). It could enhance completeness by noting whether the operation is idempotent or if the target label is created automatically.

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%, documenting both message_ids and account parameters. The description mentions 'messages' generically but adds no specific syntax guidance, format examples, or semantic constraints beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema coverage is complete.

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 explicitly states the action ('move messages'), the destination ('To Be Deleted' label), and the nature of the operation ('Soft-delete'). It clearly distinguishes from permanent deletion and distinguishes from siblings like gmail_read or gmail_search by specifying this is a labeling/mutation action.

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 clear negative guidance ('Does NOT delete or trash messages') which signals when NOT to use this tool. However, it stops short of explicitly naming which sibling tool to use for permanent deletion or trashing, though it implies this is a preliminary step.

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