zoho_archive_emails

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the write-but-safe profile is partly covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: the destination (Archive folder), the caveat 'on most accounts', and the implication that the action is reversible via move.

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?

Two tight sentences with the core action front-loaded, followed by the reversal path and then the parameter rule. Every clause earns its place and nothing is padded.

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 two-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers the action, its effect, the reversal path, and the parameter selection rule. It leaves the return shape implicit, but with no output schema declared that is a minor omission.

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?

Property-level schema coverage is effectively zero despite the item-level notes, so the description carries the semantic load. It explains that messageId targets an individual email, threadId targets a whole conversation, and that exactly one of the two must be supplied — a real constraint the schema conveys only via additionalProperties and minItems.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Archive emails') with the observable effect ('moves them to the Archive folder'). It distinguishes itself from sibling zoho_move_emails by naming it explicitly as the reversal path, so an agent can route between the two.

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 names the alternative (zoho_move_emails) and the condition that calls for it (moving archived mail back), which clarifies when this tool is the right pick versus a move. It does not contrast against delete, spam, or label operations, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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