batch-flag-messages

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that colors are applied via Mail.app (AppleScript) and that IMAP-routed ids are flagged but not colored. It also states the return value: counts of flagged and failed.

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?

Four sentences in a single paragraph. Clear and front-loaded with the main action. Could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points) but is efficient and readable.

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?

Covers prerequisites, return value, and color behavior nuance. An output schema exists but is not shown; the description fills in the return format. Still, could mention how to interpret the counts or error handling.

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?

Two parameters with 50% schema description coverage. The description adds context: explains the color enum values and notes that IMAP ids get colorless flags. For ids, it mentions the range (1-100) already in schema but adds guidance on sourcing ids.

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 tool batches flagging of multiple messages (1-100 ids), optionally with a color. It explicitly distinguishes from single-flag and unflag tools, leaving no ambiguity.

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?

Explicit when-to-use (flagging multiple messages) and when-not-to-use (single flag -> use flag-message, removing flags -> use batch-unflag-messages). Also gives a prerequisite: get ids from search-messages or list-messages.

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