bulk_flag

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

Annotations already indicate it is not read-only and not destructive. The description confirms it performs a write operation ('flag or unflag'), but does not elaborate on edge cases (e.g., no matching messages, conjunction behavior). This is adequate but not rich.

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 no wasted words. The key information is front-loaded: the action and the benefit over alternatives.

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 bulk operation tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and usage. It could mention the effect on individual messages, but the essentials are present.

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 100% with descriptions for each parameter. The description reinforces the filtering criteria but does not add new semantics beyond the schema.

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 action ('flag or unflag multiple messages'), the resource ('messages'), and the filtering criteria ('by mailbox, sender substring, or both'). It also distinguishes from the sibling tool 'set_message_flags' by citing performance benefits.

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 explains when to use this tool (for bulk flagging) and contrasts it with a single-message alternative ('set_message_flags'). It does not explicitly list when not to use it or compare with other bulk tools like 'bulk_mark_read', but the context is sufficient for typical use.

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