gmail_move

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses availability constraints and the alternative action, but it does not explain mutation side effects such as whether conversations are removed from their current folder, whether the move is reversible, or whether any confirmation is required.

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 front-loaded and tightly structured: the first sentence states the action and destination types, and the second gives availability and alternative guidance. There is no redundant or filler text.

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?

The schema is rich and fully documented, so the description does not need to repeat parameter details. It supplies enough purpose and routing context for an agent to call the tool correctly, though it could say more about mutation effects given the absence of annotations.

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%, so the schema already documents all eight parameters thoroughly. The description adds destination examples such as inbox categories and labels, but it does not add meaning for the selection parameters beyond what the schema already provides.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: move conversations to a folder, inbox category, label, or the Inbox. It also distinguishes the tool from gmail.label in ordinary search results, so an agent can identify its role without opening the schema.

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?

It explicitly states where 'Move to' is available and where it is not, then names the alternative: use gmail.label on ordinary search results. This is clear when-to-use, when-not-to-use, and alternative routing.

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