imap_bulk_delete

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the behavioral burden, and it only says 'Delete'. It does not state that deletion is irreversible, that `confirm` must be true, or what happens to a batch if some IDs are invalid. The 'up to 500' limit is helpful but insufficient for a destructive operation.

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 a single compact sentence that front-loads the core action and limit. It is appropriately terse, though the lack of any usage context slightly limits its informational payoff.

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?

This is a destructive bulk operation with no annotations, multiple closely related sibling tools, a confirmation parameter, and a batch limit; the description alone does not provide enough context for an agent to safely select and invoke it. It omits when to use it, its destructive implications, and how confirmation is handled, despite having an output schema to cover return values.

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 100%, and the property descriptions already explain the required confirm flag and message ID constraint. The tool description adds little beyond the word 'bulk', so it meets the baseline but does not enrich the parameter semantics.

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 names a concrete action ('Delete') and a resource dimension ('up to 500 messages in one operation'), which conveys the bulk nature of the tool. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from imap_search_and_delete, which can also delete multiple messages, or clarify that target messages are supplied by message IDs.

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 provides no guidance about when to use imap_bulk_delete instead of imap_delete_message, imap_search_and_delete, or imap_bulk_move. The schema notes that message IDs must be from the same mailbox, but no explicit when-to-use or alternative-selection cues are given.

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