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

Annotations already disclose destructiveHint=true and that the operation is not idempotent. The description adds that the deletion includes panels, that it can be undone via Agent activity, and that it is refused for specific entry types. This is useful beyond annotations, but it does not cover permissions, rate limits, or exact reversal mechanics.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and scope, followed by recovery, refusal, and user-consent instructions. Every sentence adds needed information with no redundancy.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers deletion scope, recovery, refusal, and consent. However, it omits parameter details and any mention of required permissions or side effects on linked data beyond panels, leaving some gaps.

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% for the single entryId parameter, and the description does not explain what an entryId is, where to find it, or its format. The description provides no semantic detail beyond the schema type, leaving a critical parameter undocumented.

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 clear verb+resource: 'Delete one wiki entry and its panels.' This distinguishes it from siblings like update_entry or search_entries. However, it does not explicitly note what makes it different from other delete or write operations beyond the scope statement.

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?

It implies the action is for entries and provides some conditions (refused for characters/roles, ask user first), but it does not explicitly say when to choose delete_entry versus update_entry or other alternatives. The guidance is present but not fully comparative.

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