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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'delete' without mentioning that the operation is destructive, irreversible, or what happens on invalid IDs or partial failures. This adds minimal context beyond the action itself.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no redundant words. It efficiently conveys the core operation and the input type, making it easy to parse.

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 one-parameter delete tool, the description states the essential operation, but it lacks behavioral details such as idempotency, error handling, and irreversibility. Given the absence of annotations and output schema, the description is minimally viable but not fully complete for nuanced execution.

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 schema description coverage is 0%, and the description merely repeats 'by IDs' without explaining ID provenance, format constraints, or behavior for nonexistent IDs. The single parameter is obvious from the tool name, so the description adds little meaning beyond the schema's basic structure.

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 ('prompts') with the batch scope and input method ('by IDs'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like batch_create_prompts, batch_get_prompt_by_ids, and batch_update_prompts.

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 description implies usage when an agent needs to delete multiple prompts by IDs, but it does not provide explicit context or exclusions, such as when to use another tool or any prerequisites. The sibling tool names suggest alternatives, but no direct guidance is given.

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