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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is partly covered, but the description goes further by naming exactly what is destroyed (sessions, invites, members), stating permanence, and specifying the auth/Admin Mode requirement. That is the cascade and permission context an agent cannot get from annotations.

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?

Five short sentences with the core action and cascade front-loaded, then constraints, then a safety instruction. Slight redundancy in the standalone 'Destructive.' sentence, which duplicates destructiveHint=true, but nothing is padded.

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 destructive mutation with an output schema present (so return values need not be explained), the description covers action, cascade effect, permissions, irreversibility, and confirmation. Nothing an agent needs to call it safely 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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the single `id` parameter is documented in the schema as the Mongo `_id`. The description only restates 'by id' and adds no format or sourcing guidance, so the schema carries this dimension. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 (Permanently delete) and resource (campaign by id), and immediately distinguishes it from sibling deletions like play_delete_session or play_delete_page by declaring the cascade: all sessions, invites, and members go with it. An agent can tell exactly what this tool does and its blast radius.

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 explicit authorization gates (owner, or admin with Admin Mode on) and an explicit exclusion (a gamemaster cannot delete it), plus a procedural instruction to confirm with the user first. This is when-to-use, when-not, and preconditions in one compact block.

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