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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds valuable context by specifying it is a soft-delete and that the appliance is hidden from list_appliances without being permanently erased. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that states the action and its key consequence. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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 tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, behavior, and expected side effects. It explains what happens (hidden from list, not erased) without needing to describe return values or complex edge cases.

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 input schema already covers the only parameter 'id' with a clear description ('ID of the appliance to delete.') and example. Since schema_description_coverage is 100%, the description need not add parameter details, and it does not.

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 uses a specific verb ('soft-delete') and resource ('appliance') and clearly distinguishes the operation from a permanent deletion by explaining that it is hidden from list_appliances but not permanently erased. This provides clear purpose and differentiates it from any other delete semantics.

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 implies when to use the tool (when a soft-delete is desired) but provides no explicit alternatives or exclusions. It mentions the effect on list_appliances, giving some context, but lacks direct guidance on when to choose this vs. update_appliance or other tools.

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