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

The description explicitly labels the action as 'destructive state-changing' and says it 'removes' the Space, aligning with the annotations (destructiveHint: true, readOnlyHint: false). It adds a note about MCP client authorization, which slightly exceeds the annotations but does not contradict them.

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 two sentences, but includes some redundant phrasing like 'manageable' and 'directly after the MCP client authorizes.' It is still concise and front-loaded with the primary purpose, so it loses only a point for minor wordiness.

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 delete operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the purpose, usage condition, parameter source, and an explicit exclusion (not for individual pages). It is complete enough for an agent to invoke correctly without needing additional context.

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 tool description mentions that a numeric space_id is required and that it should come from list-spaces, complementing the schema's parameter description which already provides detailed context. The schema coverage is 100% for the single parameter, and the description adds extra sourcing guidance.

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's purpose: to delete a whole documentation Space. It uses a specific verb ('delete') and resource ('Space'), and explicitly distinguishes this from deleting individual pages, making its scope unambiguous.

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 provides clear when-to-use guidance: only when the user explicitly wants to delete an entire Space. It also instructs to use list-spaces first and confirms the user's intent, and explicitly warns against using it for individual pages, which effectively differentiates it from related tools.

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