imap_move_message

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for disclosing side effects, yet it only says 'Move a message to mailbox.' It does not state that the message is removed from the source mailbox, whether the destination must already exist, or any error/permission consequences. The same-account limitation is additionally hidden in the schema description.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately compact, though it sacrifices useful behavioral context for brevity.

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 mutating operation with no annotations, the description is too thin. It omits the same-account limitation and the destructive effect on the source mailbox, leaving the agent to discover these from the schema description or infer them from the tool name. The output schema covers return shape, so that part is not a gap.

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 all three parameters already have meaningful descriptions, so the schema carries the parameter-level semantic weight. The tool description adds no additional parameter detail beyond this.

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 operation: moving a message to a mailbox, with a specific verb and resource. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like imap_bulk_move or imap_copy_message, so it stops short of full differentiation.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool over imap_bulk_move, imap_search_and_move, or imap_copy_message. The same-account constraint appears only in the schema description, not in the tool description, so an agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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