Delete a mailbox

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

Annotations already flag the tool as destructive and non-read-only. The description adds valuable context: 'live verification' (checks emptiness at call time) and 'safe fallback' (presumably aborts if non-empty). This goes beyond the annotation flags, though the fallback mechanism is somewhat vague.

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 11-word sentence with the core action and constraint front-loaded. Every phrase earns its place, and there is no redundancy or fluff.

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 two-parameter destructive tool with a full input schema and annotation coverage, the description covers the key condition (empty-only) and the safety behavior. The exact behavior of the 'safe fallback' is unspecified, but the output schema likely documents the return value, so this is a minor gap.

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%: both parameters are described in the input schema, including path semantics with slashes and account UUID. The description itself adds no parameter-specific detail, so the baseline of 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 description states a specific verb ('Delete'), resource ('mailbox'), and a clear precondition ('empty mailbox only'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like mailbox_create and triage_plan_delete, and the 'empty only' qualifier precisely scopes the operation.

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?

'Delete an empty mailbox only' explicitly sets the condition for safe invocation and implies the tool is not for non-empty mailboxes. It doesn't name alternative tools, but no competing mailbox-deletion sibling exists, so the guidance is sufficient for selecting it.

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