email_remove_account

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Remove' implies destruction, but it fails to disclose whether this permanently deletes the account configuration, whether it impacts synced emails, whether it can be restored, or whether any authorization is required. For a destructive mutation tool with zero annotative coverage, this is a significant gap.

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 appropriately terse — one short clause with no filler words or redundant restatements. It is maximally concise, though the brevity comes at the cost of behavioral detail.

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?

This is a destructive mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema. The one-line description is adequate only to identify purpose but fails to communicate side effects, reversibility, or data impact. Substantially more behavioral explanation is warranted for a removal operation.

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 single parameter accountId is documented only in the schema (type string). The description adds nothing about what accountId represents or how to obtain it (e.g., from email_list_accounts). Schema coverage is 0%, so the description does not compensate, but with just one mutually obvious parameter, the cost is modest.

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 the action (remove) and resource (email account), which is clear enough to distinguish from email_add_account. However, it doesn't clarify what 'removing' an account entails (e.g., whether it deletes data, unlinks creds, etc.) or whether it's reversible, leaving some ambiguity about scope.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives. There are related sibling tools like email_add_account (the inverse) and email_test_account, but the description doesn't indicate when removal is appropriate, what prerequisites exist, or what the consequence is (e.g., data loss, breaking sync).

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