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

Adds substantial context beyond the annotations: the destructiveHint is elaborated with what actually gets destroyed (all regions and asset placements), clarifies what is NOT deleted (the PDF in storage), and states a required auth scope. This is exactly the extra behavioral detail annotations cannot carry.

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?

Three tight sentences with the verb front-loaded, followed by the destructive warning, the storage caveat, and the scope requirement. Every sentence earns its place with no 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?

Covers cascade impact, storage side effects, and permission requirements for a single-parameter destructive operation, and needs no output schema for a delete. Nothing an agent needs to call it 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?

Single 'id' parameter at 100% schema coverage, so the schema already documents it as a floorplan UUID. The description adds no format or interpretation detail beyond what the schema provides, which is the baseline expectation.

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 (Delete) and resource (floorplan) that cleanly distinguishes it from siblings like delete_floorplan_region or delete_asset_placement. An agent can identify the target without opening the schema.

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?

Gives clear context that deletion cascades and that the underlying PDF must be removed separately, but never names an alternative tool or states an explicit precondition for choosing this over deleting individual regions. Clear context, no exclusions.

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