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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden. It clearly indicates a destructive action and describes a key error response, but it does not mention success behavior, irreversibility, or other side effects.

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 extremely concise with two short sentences, no fluff, and the core action is stated first. It is well-structured for quick scanning.

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 simplicity of a delete operation, the description covers the essential action, required permission, and an error case. However, it omits the success response and any details about the deletion being permanent or having cascading effects, which would improve completeness.

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?

Both parameters have schema descriptions but they are merely repetitions of the parameter names ('activity_id', 'organization_id'), providing zero semantic insight. The description text adds no clarification about the purpose or format of these parameters beyond the schema.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'Deletes' and the resource 'one activity' from the tenant CRM. It is specific enough to distinguish from other operations, though it does not explicitly name a sibling tool.

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?

Provides a prerequisite (crm:write permission) and an error condition (404 for foreign/missing id), but does not indicate when to prefer this over alternative delete tools (e.g., platform vs tenant).

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