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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds the word 'permanently' and the HTTP method, reinforcing the destructive nature. However, it does not provide additional behavioral context such as irreversibility confirmation, authorization requirements, or side effects beyond what the annotations imply.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the key action 'Permanently delete,' and contains no redundant filler. Every word contributes to clarifying the tool's purpose and method.

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?

Given the simple interface (one parameter, output schema present, strong annotations), the description is sufficiently complete. It states the action, the target identifier, and the HTTP method. It does not explain return values, but the output schema handles that. The only minor omission is that it doesn't explicitly mention irreversibility beyond 'permanently,' which is largely covered.

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 schema covers the only parameter (bot_id) with 100% coverage, describing it as 'Numeric bot id of the agent to delete.' The description repeats this by saying 'by numeric bot id,' adding no new meaning. Thus, the description relies on the schema, and the baseline of 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?

The description clearly states the tool's function: 'Permanently delete an agent by numeric bot id via DELETE /v1/delete-agent/{id}.' It specifies the verb (delete), resource (agent), and method (DELETE), and it distinguishes from sibling tools like 'delete-agent-versions' which targets versions, not the whole agent.

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 usage (permanent deletion of an agent) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. There is no comparison to other agent-management tools like deactivate or clone.

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