delete_message

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It does this well by clarifying that the operation is non-destructive and specifying the destination folder. It stops short of mentioning permissions, recoverability, or side effects, but the core behavioral trait is clearly communicated.

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 filler. It conveys the operation and its most important behavioral nuance in just nine words.

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 simple two-parameter delete operation, the description conveys the essential behavior and outcome. However, it lacks explicit guidance on the optional mailbox parameter and does not state what happens if the message is already in Deleted Items or does not exist, leaving some ambiguity for the agent.

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 0%, so the description needed to compensate by explaining how message_id and mailbox are used. It does not mention either parameter, leaving the agent to infer from the schema property titles alone. The only implicit link is the word 'message', which suggests message_id identifies the target.

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 specific action ('Soft-delete') and resource ('a message'), and adds a concrete behavioral detail: it moves the message to Deleted Items. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like archive_message or move_message.

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 'soft-delete' phrasing implies the appropriate use case: removing a message while retaining it in Deleted Items rather than permanently deleting it. However, it does not explicitly describe when to prefer this over sibling tools like archive_message or move_message.

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