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

Annotations already declare destructive=true and idempotent=true, but the description adds substantial context: what data is destroyed, that the utility keeps running, that public addresses are replaced and old ones stop working, and that the operation works after plan end.

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 front-loaded with the core action, then adds necessary consequences and edge-case coverage in two compact sentences. Every sentence adds useful information without repetition.

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 bulk-delete tool, the description covers what is deleted, the operational side effects, the public address replacement, and the post-plan availability. Annotations and schema already handle safety and parameters, and no output schema is needed.

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 documents instance_id and passport_token. The description adds no parameter-level detail, which is acceptable since the schema carries the parameter semantics.

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 everything one utility stores. It enumerates the data categories affected and distinguishes the broad wipe from sibling tools like delete_ask, delete_form_submissions, and locker_delete.

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?

Clear context is provided: use it to delete all utility data at once and for good, including after the plan ended. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not to use it, but the 'everything at once' scope implicitly contrasts with per-resource deletion siblings.

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