outlook_delete_draft

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

The description says 'delete', which matches the destructiveHint: true annotation, but adds no further behavioral detail (e.g., irreversibility, cascading effects, or permissions). With annotations already indicating destructiveness, the description contributes no new transparency.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the core action efficiently. However, it is so brief that it sacrifices useful detail, making it borderline for conciseness rather than under-specification.

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 simple delete-by-ID operation with annotations covering destructiveness, the description is minimally adequate. It lacks prerequisites, error conditions, or return value expectations, but no output schema exists. The tool's simplicity justifies a moderate score.

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% for the single parameter (draft_id). The description mentions deletion 'by ID' but does not clarify the ID format, source, or validation constraints. This does not compensate for the missing parameter documentation.

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 'Delete a draft message by ID' uses a specific verb (delete) and resource (draft), clearly differentiating it from sibling tools like outlook_delete_contact or outlook_delete_event. The action and target are unambiguous.

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. For instance, there is no mention of conditions for deletion or distinction from outlook_update_draft or outlook_send_draft. The description lacks context for appropriate usage.

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