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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds material context they cannot convey: existing answers are retained on past appointments but lose their label, the operation is irreversible, the required scope/role is locations:write (Admin), and the return payload is { deleted: true }. No contradiction with the annotations.

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?

Four tight sentences, no filler, and the most decision-relevant fact (permanent removal) plus the alternative are front-loaded before the softer details about answer retention and auth scope.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description states the return value; it also covers prerequisites (scope/role), side effects on existing answers, and reversibility. Nothing an agent needs to invoke this destructive tool safely is missing.

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 both parameters already document their source (list_locations, list_booking_questions), so the schema carries the load. The description adds no extra meaning about locationId or questionId beyond what the schema states, making the baseline 3 correct.

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?

"Remove a booking question for good" gives a specific verb (remove/delete), the exact resource, and permanence in the first clause. It is unmistakably distinct from create_booking_question, list_booking_questions, and update_booking_question 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?

Explicitly routes the agent: if the goal is to keep existing answers, use update_booking_question with isActive=false instead. It also states the irreversible "can't be undone" condition, giving both when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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