delete mail account

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the destructive nature is covered. The description adds that it deletes 'a mailbox and its messages' and that it executes a 'verified command', which gives some context about scope. However, it does not disclose whether deletion is permanent, whether it affects related data, or any confirmation requirements beyond the schema's confirm field.

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 very short and front-loaded with the core action. The second sentence about the verified command adds a small amount of context without bloat. It earns its place, though it could be slightly more informative without becoming verbose.

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 destructive tool with 4 required parameters and no output schema details, the description is thin. It does not explain the role of each parameter, the permanence of deletion, or any safety checks beyond the confirm flag. The annotations cover the destructive hint, but the description leaves too much for the agent to infer about how to invoke it correctly.

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 description coverage is only 25%, with only the 'confirm' parameter described. The description does not explain the meaning of 'user', 'domain', or 'account' beyond their names. For a destructive operation, the agent needs to know that 'account' is the mailbox local part and 'domain' is the mail domain, but this is left to inference.

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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Delete a mailbox and its messages.' It also mentions the underlying command 'v-delete-mail-account', which adds specificity. It does not explicitly distinguish from sibling delete tools, but the resource (mailbox) is unambiguous.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or conditions. The description only states what it does, not when it should be invoked. The sibling list includes delete_mail_domain and delete_user, but no exclusions or routing guidance is given.

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