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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and the description reinforces the permanence of the operation. It adds value beyond the annotations with platform capability limits (Google does not permit deleting reviews, only the business reply), which is behavioral context the annotations cannot express. It stops short of describing failure modes or confirmation requirements.

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, front-loaded with the destructive action and followed by the preference rule and platform specifics. No filler or redundant restatement of the name.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description carries the return-value burden, and it does not say what a successful deletion returns. It fully covers platform scope, the hide-vs-delete decision, and ID sourcing, which is most of what an agent needs for a 4-parameter destructive tool.

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 75%, so a baseline of 3 applies, but the description genuinely adds meaning: it redefines commentId as the review id for Google Business Profile, which the schema's generic 'The comment to delete' does not convey. It also tells the agent where to obtain accountId, platform and commentId, covering the required set.

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 and resource ('Permanently delete a comment') and immediately scopes platform behavior, including the Google-specific nuance that it deletes the business's reply rather than the review. An agent can distinguish this from hide_comment on the permanence axis without opening either 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?

Explicitly routes the agent: 'Prefer hide_comment unless the user explicitly asks to delete,' naming both the alternative and the condition that selects it. It also points to list_recent_comments and get_post_comments as the source of the required IDs.

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