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

Beyond the annotations' destructiveHint=true, it discloses what the annotations cannot: deletion is permanent, the call is refused when expectedTitle mismatches the current title, refused when the week is This Week, and it requires a linked Chop It account. Those refusal paths are exactly the behavioral detail an agent needs before invoking a destructive tool.

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?

One tight multi-clause sentence with permanence and scope first, followed by the confirmation-token behavior and the auth prerequisite. No filler and no restatement of the title.

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?

Return values are covered by the output schema, and the destructive/refusal/auth picture is well drawn. The one thing left implicit is post-deletion retry behavior (a second call on an already-deleted week), which matters given idempotentHint=false.

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%, but the description compensates: savedWeekId identifies the target saved week, and expectedTitle is explained as the week's current title as list_saved_weeks reports it, making its guard-rail function explicit. It never states where savedWeekId itself is obtained, so one small gap remains.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Permanently deletes ... a Saved Week') keyed by savedWeekId, which clearly separates it from rename_saved_week, delete_recipe and list_saved_weeks. The irreversibility is front-loaded so an agent recognizes the destructive class immediately.

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 scopes usage to 'an explicit request that names the week', which is a real when-to-use condition, and it names list_saved_weeks as the source of expectedTitle. It stops short of naming an alternative tool for adjacent intents (e.g. removing the current week, which is refused), so it is clear but not fully routed.

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