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

Adds real context beyond annotations: the tool sends an email link, requires the owner to sign in, type their email, and confirm, so no immediate destruction occurs. This reconciles the destructiveHint=true with actual behavior. It doesn't mention rate limits or what happens if the owner doesn't act.

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?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the critical safety clarification. No wasted words.

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?

The two-step flow and safety profile are well covered, and no output schema exists to explain. However, the meaning of the required delete_events parameter is left unaddressed, which is a real gap for a tool the agent must call correctly.

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 0% and the required delete_events boolean is never explained — the agent cannot tell whether it means 'delete events along with the account.' Only the vague phrase 'with your choices preselected' gestures at how reason/delete_events are used.

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?

Precise verb+resource: it emails a link that opens the deletion dialog, and explicitly states it does not delete anything. This clearly distinguishes it from actual delete operations among siblings (delete_event, delete_sync).

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 makes clear this is the initiation step for account deletion rather than the deletion itself, which tells the agent when to reach for it. It doesn't name alternatives or exclusions, but no sibling competes for this exact purpose.

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