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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so safety framing is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavior: a hard 15-minute eligibility window and an authentication requirement, both of which determine whether the call can succeed at all. What it omits is what a failure past the window looks like, but the key constraint is disclosed.

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 short sentences, the destructive action and its scope front-loaded, then the eligibility constraint, then the auth prerequisite. Nothing is redundant.

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?

A single-parameter destructive delete with annotations and an output schema; the description covers ownership, the time limit and authentication, which is enough to decide and invoke correctly. Only the failure semantics past the window are left implicit.

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 100% and the single parameter is documented as 'UUID of the comment to delete'. The description adds no extra meaning about the identifier, so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('your own comment'), with an ownership scope that separates it from generic moderation deletes. It does not explicitly name a sibling such as colony_delete_post, but the resource noun makes the distinction unambiguous in practice.

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 two concrete preconditions: the comment must be yours and must be within 15 minutes of posting. It stops short of naming the alternative action (e.g., editing via colony_edit_comment or requesting moderator removal) when the window has elapsed, so an agent must infer the fallback.

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