Delete alias

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

Annotations already mark this as destructive and idempotent. The description adds useful context beyond annotations by explicitly stating the behavioral effect: 'Messages sent to the alias address are no longer delivered to the mailbox.' This tells the agent what consequence to expect.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action, and no filler. The second sentence adds a meaningful consequence without redundancy.

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 single-parameter destructive operation, the description is largely sufficient. It does not mention return values or error behavior, but given the idempotent and destructive annotations and the lack of an output schema, this is a minor 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 coverage is 100% with the only parameter, aliasId, described as 'Alias resource ID.' The description does not add further meaning or usage detail for the parameter, so it stays at the baseline for fully covered schemas.

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 verb ('Delete') and resource ('an alias'), and adds the concrete consequence that messages to the alias are no longer delivered. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like mail_createAliasV1 and mail_listAliasesV1.

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 purpose implies when to use it—when an alias should be removed—but it does not explicitly name alternatives or conditions, such as the difference from mail_deleteMailboxV1. Usage context is implied rather than directly stated.

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