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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint and openWorldHint, but the description goes further by disclosing exactly what happens: stores are reassigned to the Default workspace and member assignments are revoked first, plus the account-wide key requirement. This is the kind of side-effect disclosure a destructive tool needs.

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?

Three tight sentences with the destructive scope front-loaded and the safety constraint prominent. The trailing '[#c566a1]' token is stray noise that slightly detracts from an otherwise clean structure.

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 single-parameter destructive mutation with no output schema, the description covers effects, blocking conditions, prerequisites, and a preview path. Nothing an agent needs before invoking it 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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the schema already tells the agent the uuid comes from list_my_workspaces. The description adds no further parameter detail, so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete a workspace') and narrows the scope to agency/Enterprise workspaces, distinguishing it from sibling update_workspace and create_workspace. An agent can identify the operation immediately.

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 names the preview alternative ('Preview with check_workspace_deletion'), states a blocking exclusion ('The Default workspace cannot be deleted'), and gives a prerequisite ('Needs an account-wide key'). This is full when/when-not/alternative guidance.

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