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

Annotations already convey destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds valuable context beyond these annotations by specifying the post states eligible for deletion. It also reinforces permanence with 'permanently remove,' which aligns with destructive behavior.

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 two short sentences with no filler. The action and primary constraint are front-loaded ('Delete a post by ID'), followed by the eligibility condition and usage intent. Every sentence contributes value.

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?

For a simple delete operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what it does, when it can be used, and the permanent nature. With annotations and full schema coverage, no critical information 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?

The input schema provides full coverage (100%) for the single parameter 'postId' with its description. The tool description does not add new meaning about the parameter (e.g., format, constraints) beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 identifies the action ('Delete'), the resource ('a post'), and the qualifier ('by ID'). It also specifies the scope ('Only draft and failed posts') which distinguishes it from other post-related tools like publish_post or update_post.

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 provides clear usage context ('Only draft and failed posts can be deleted') and states the goal ('when the user wants to permanently remove a post'). It implies that posts in other states should not be deleted here, but it does not explicitly name alternatives like retry_post or update_post.

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