Move Email Rule to Bottom

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

The description adds nuance beyond annotations, noting that user confirmation is recommended and specifying that the tool returns an updated rule with a new sequence number. This complements the annotations which indicate a non-destructive modification.

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 concise and well-structured, using a brief heading, callout, and separate Args/Returns sections. No unnecessary words, though it could be slightly more organized.

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 purpose, parameter semantics, and return value adequately. Given that an output schema exists, the return value description is sufficient. However, it lacks information on error handling, prerequisites, or rate limits, which is acceptable for this tool.

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 the 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by providing brief but clear descriptions for both parameters: rule_id is the message rule ID to move, account_id is the Microsoft account ID. This gives agents basic understanding of each parameter.

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 that the tool moves a message rule to the bottom of execution order, using the verb 'move' and resource 'email rule'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like move_down, move_top, and move_up, which move rules in different ways.

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 that rules execute in sequence order and that moving to bottom means the rule runs after all others. It provides clear context for when to use the tool, though it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare with alternatives.

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