Delete Mailbox Folder

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds valuable context: messages are moved to Trash (not permanently deleted immediately) and that references must be removed first. This behavioral detail helps the agent understand side effects and preconditions. No contradiction with annotations.

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, consisting of two sentences with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the action and then gives prerequisites. Every sentence adds critical 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?

Given the presence of annotations and an output schema, the description covers the essential behavioral aspects (destructive but moves messages to Trash) and prerequisites. It could mention that the folder must be custom (not system) and what happens if prerequisites are not met, but overall it is adequate.

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 schema has two parameters: 'id' (described as 'ShipMail resource ID.') and 'folder_id' (no description). The description does not provide any additional semantics for these parameters beyond what is in the schema. With 50% schema description coverage, the description should compensate but does not, leaving the agent uncertain about what values to provide.

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 (delete) and the specific resource (custom mailbox folder). It also mentions the prerequisite steps (moving messages to Trash and removing references), which distinguishes this tool from other delete tools like delete_mailbox or delete_webhook.

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 provides prerequisites: 'after moving its messages to Trash' and 'Remove references from inbox rules and Assistant automations first.' This tells the agent when to use the tool and what steps to take before invoking it. The context of sibling tools further clarifies when this tool is appropriate.

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