mail_delete_email

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

With no annotations, the description adequately discloses the two behaviors (move to trash or permanent delete). However, it omits details like reversibility, batch atomicity, or side effects, which would be important for an agent to use it safely.

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 extremely concise, using two sentences to convey purpose and parameter details. No filler or redundancy, making it 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?

The description covers core functionality and parameter semantics, but it lacks information on return values (though output schema exists) and potential side effects (e.g., whether moving to trash frees storage). An agent would need additional context for safe usage.

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?

Given 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaningful context: email_ids are JMAP IDs, and permanent controls the deletion mode with default behavior. Both parameters are clearly explained, exceeding what the bare schema provides.

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 emails by moving to Trash or permanently destroying them, which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from siblings like mail_move_email by focusing on deletion actions, but does not explicitly contrast with other operations.

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 over alternatives such as mail_move_email or mail_archive_email. The description only explains the two deletion modes, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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