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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description goes well beyond that by disclosing exactly what is destroyed and what is preserved: dashboards keep their other charts and the underlying saved query is retained. That is precisely the context an agent needs before committing an irreversible mutation.

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, each earning its place: the core action, the preservation semantics, and the alternative route. The destructive scope is front-loaded ahead of the sibling pointers.

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 is needed for a delete, and the description covers the safety profile, blast radius, and alternatives. Nothing required to call this tool correctly 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 description coverage is 100% and both parameters are documented with their sources (fastero_list_reports, fastero_get_dashboard, fastero_list_projects). The description adds no further parameter meaning, so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete a report permanently') and immediately scopes the blast radius (comes off every dashboard in the organization). It names two related siblings, fastero_delete_query and fastero_update_dashboard, so an agent can distinguish it from adjacent operations without opening schemas.

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 covers when to use it (permanent org-wide removal), what it does not do (the saved query survives), and the alternative path for a narrower intent ('To take it off one dashboard only, fastero_update_dashboard with a layout that leaves it out'). The routing decision is fully specified.

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