gmail_remove_label

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

With no annotations provided, the description conveys the core behavior (removing a label) but lacks details on consequences, required permissions, or what happens if the label is not present. It is adequate for a simple mutation but could be richer.

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 front-loaded, consisting of two sentences with no unnecessary information. Every sentence adds value.

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 tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and prerequisite. It is largely complete, though it omits details on success/failure indicators or error conditions.

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 input schema already provides full descriptions for all three parameters (100% coverage). The description adds value only by referencing 'gmail_list_labels' for obtaining labelId, which is helpful but does not significantly enhance understanding of email or messageId.

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 action: removing a label from an email. It uses a specific verb ('remove') and resource ('label from an email'), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'gmail_apply_label'.

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 explicitly directs users to use 'gmail_list_labels' to obtain label IDs, providing clear prerequisite guidance. However, it does not include when not to use this tool or alternative approaches.

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