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

With no annotations supplied, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose one important behavioral trait: deleting a query also removes its grades (a cascade). It does not state irreversibility, permission requirements, or that an API key is needed to authenticate, which a destructive tool should surface.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence naming the endpoint and the effect. The REST path prefix is mildly redundant but it is short and wastes no words.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the cascade to grades is covered. However, for a destructive mutation with no annotations and an undocumented auth parameter, the description should do more about irreversibility and credentials.

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 description coverage is 0% across two parameters. The description identifies `id` as the query identifier, but the `api_key` parameter is completely undocumented in both schema and description, leaving the agent to guess how authentication is supplied.

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 and resource — 'delete the query `id`' — and adds the side effect that its grades go with it. It is unambiguous, though it does not distinguish this tool from other deleters such as delete_node in the sibling set.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus delete_node or other cleanup paths, and no stated preconditions or exclusions. The agent is left to infer that this is for removing queries permanently.

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