outlook_delete_message

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

The destructiveHint annotation already signals destructive behavior, and the description adds useful nuance about soft versus hard deletion. It does not detail return values or irreversibility consequences, but the essential behavioral traits are disclosed.

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 two concise sentences with no redundant information. The key guidance is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 operation with two parameters, the description provides enough context to use the tool correctly, including the distinction from a sibling tool. It omits output details, but that is not critical for correct 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?

The description directly explains the permanent parameter's effect, and message_id is self-explanatory given the tool purpose. Schema coverage is limited to types and titles, but the description fills the most important semantic gap.

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 tool deletes a message, with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes this operation from the related outlook_move_message tool by explicitly warning against using move for deletion.

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?

It explicitly says this is the canonical way to delete a message and instructs not to use outlook_move_message for deletion. It also clarifies the default soft-delete behavior and how to request a hard delete.

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