batch-unflag-messages

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It discloses return counts (unflagged and failed), the requirement for sourceMailbox/sourceAccount to pin numeric ids, and that ambiguous ids are refused rather than guessed. This is rich behavioral context beyond what the schema provides.

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, front-loaded with the primary use case, and each sentence earns its place. No redundancy or filler.

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 batch mutation tool with an output schema, the description covers usage, alternatives, parameter disambiguation, and return behavior. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool 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 coverage is 67%, with sourceAccount and sourceMailbox already described. The description adds crucial semantics for these parameters (pinning, refusal behavior) and clarifies the ids use case (1-100 messages). While it doesn't detail id format, the schema's pattern handles that.

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 the tool removes flags from multiple messages (1-100 ids) in one call, with a specific verb and resource. Explicitly distinguishes from siblings by naming unflag-message for single and batch-flag-messages for adding flags.

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?

Provides explicit 'Use when' and 'Do not use when' guidance with alternative tool names. Also instructs to get ids from search-messages or list-messages beforehand, giving clear prerequisites.

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