Delete autoreply

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

Beyond the annotations, the description adds a concrete behavioral consequence: the mailbox stops sending automatic replies immediately. This gives the agent a useful temporal and functional expectation. It does not contradict the destructiveHint or idempotentHint annotations.

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 deliver the action and its immediate effect with no redundancy. The description is front-loaded with the core operation and stays within the necessary scope.

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?

With one required parameter, no nested objects, no output schema, and annotations already covering destructive and idempotent behavior, the description sufficiently explains what the tool does and what happens after the call. Nothing critical is missing.

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?

The only parameter, autoreplyId, is already fully described in the schema as 'Autoreply resource ID.' The description adds no additional meaning or usage guidance for the parameter, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 begins with a clear verb and resource: 'Delete the autoreply of a mailbox.' It is specific and distinct from sibling operations like mail_createAutoreplyV1, mail_updateAutoreplyV1, and mail_listAutorepliesV1.

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 second sentence, 'The mailbox stops sending automatic replies immediately,' implies the intended use case but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. There are no exclusions or alternative routing.

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