mail_permanently_delete_message

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

Annotations already set destructiveHint=true, indicating destructive nature. Description adds 'IRREVERSIBLE', 'cannot be undone', and 'bypassing/purging Trash', providing extra behavioral context beyond annotations. No contradiction.

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?

Highly concise, single sentence front-loads the irreversible nature and confirm requirement. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

Despite complexity (5 params, no output schema), description only covers the confirm parameter. Crucial details like message identification (messageId vs rfc822MessageId) and mailbox specification are missing, making it incomplete for safe execution.

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 0%, yet description only explains the 'confirm' parameter. Other parameters (accountName, mailboxPath, messageId, rfc822MessageId) are left unexplained. Description fails to compensate for lack of schema description.

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?

Description clearly states the action (permanently delete) and resource (message), with specific verbs and scope. Distinguishes from siblings like mail_delete_message by noting bypassing/purging Trash and irreversibility.

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?

Description implies when to use (irreversible deletion) and mentions confirm requirement, but lacks explicit when-not to use or comparison to alternatives like mail_delete_message. Some guidance from context but not comprehensive.

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