move_email

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

The description adds little beyond the annotations: it states 'move' but does not clarify if the email is copied or removed from the source, nor does it explain permissions, reversibility, or side effects. Annotations indicate it is not read-only and not destructive, but the description does not elaborate on what that implies for the user.

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 a single, concise sentence that directly states the tool's purpose. Every word is necessary, and there is no redundant or irrelevant information.

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 tool that modifies state (moving an email), the description lacks information about the return value (e.g., success status) or any confirmation of the operation. Given the absence of an output schema, the description should provide more context about what happens after the move.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the schema already documents both parameters (emailId format 'folder:uid', targetFolder name). The description does not add extra meaning or context beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Move an email to a different folder' clearly states the action (move) and the resource (email) with a target context. It is specific and easily understood, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'delete_email' or 'star_email'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get_email_by_id' or 'mark_email_read'. There is no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or comparison with other tools.

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