Moves an email to another folder by UID, optionally from a specified source folder. Use it to organize messages into folders like Archive or Spam.
Verschiebt eine E-Mail anhand ihrer UID in einen anderen Ordner.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| uid | Yes | Die UID der zu verschiebenden E-Mail. | |
| source_folder | No | Quellordner (optional, Standard: konfiguriertes INBOX). | |
| target_folder | Yes | Zielordner, z.B. "INBOX.Archiv" oder "INBOX.Spam". |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Verschiebt' does imply a mutating relocation, but the description does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether the source copy is removed), permissions needed, or error behavior.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; every word contributes to stating the action and its key input (UID).
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 this low-complexity tool the schema covers all parameters, but the lack of annotations and output schema leaves gaps about behavioral side effects and success/failure reporting. The description is minimally adequate but not rich.
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%, with clear descriptions for uid, source_folder, and target_folder. The description adds no parameter detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 applies.
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 German description states a specific operation ('Verschiebt... in einen anderen Ordner') on a specific resource (email by UID), which clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like list_emails, get_email, and send_email.
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 given about when to use move_email instead of alternatives, nor any prerequisites (e.g., target folder must exist) or exclusions. The only usage signal is the implied action from the tool name and description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.