gmail_thread_delete

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

With no annotations, description carries full burden. It prominently notes 'cannot be undone', a critical behavioral trait. Does not mention auth or rate limits, but for a deletion tool, the irreversibility is the key transparency need.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with verb and resource. No wasted words.

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 one-param delete tool, it conveys purpose, irreversibility, and target. Could mention relationship to trash tools, but not essential given clarity.

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% with description for threadId. The tool description does not add new meaning beyond the schema's parameter description, meeting the baseline.

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?

Clearly states it permanently deletes an entire Gmail thread, distinguishing from sibling tools like gmail_thread_trash (which moves to trash) and gmail_delete (single message).

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?

Implies irreversibility but does not explicitly contrast with gmail_thread_trash or other alternatives. The description is clear about permanent deletion, which guides usage correctly.

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