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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds the behavioral trait of permanence ("Permanently delete") and an ownership constraint, which are not explicitly stated in annotations. This goes beyond the minimal annotation information.

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 concise sentences, clearly front-loaded with the action and resource. No redundant phrasing or filler. Every word adds value.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential context: permanent deletion and a key caveat about owner-only templates. It could mention error conditions or permissions, but given the tool's simplicity, it is sufficiently complete.

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 covers 100% of parameters with a single template_id and its description. The tool description does not add significant semantic detail beyond the schema, and the schema already describes the template as a 'company template.' The parameter is straightforward, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 action: "Permanently delete a library template." This uses a specific verb (delete) and resource (library template), which directly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_template, save_template, and list_templates.

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 includes an important usage exclusion: "Owner-only templates must be deleted through their owning resource." This provides guidance on when NOT to use this tool, implying an alternative exists. It could be improved by explicitly stating the general use case (delete any library template) but the purpose makes it evident.

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