delete-mailbox

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses destructive consequences, removal of contained messages, requirement for explicit user confirmation, and prerequisite to list-mailboxes first. This is highly transparent.

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 concise, front-loaded with use cases, and structured into clear sections (Use when, Returns, Do not use when, Safety). Every sentence adds value 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 destructive tool with no annotations, the description covers purpose, usage boundaries, return value, safety, prerequisites, and needed confirmation. It is fully contextual.

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 50% (account has description, name does not). The description adds some context (e.g., exact name confirmation via list-mailboxes) but does not deeply elaborate on parameters. Since coverage is moderate and some extra meaning is added, a 3 is appropriate.

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 deletes a mailbox/folder, uses a specific verb+resource, and distinguishes from siblings by naming alternatives like rename-mailbox and delete-message/batch-delete-messages.

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?

Explicitly provides when to use ('deleting a mailbox/folder'), what it returns, and when not to use (renaming, deleting messages), naming specific alternative tools. This is excellent guidance.

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