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

Annotations already mark the tool destructive and idempotent. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral context: deletion is permanent, and protected translations stop referencing the term within 30 seconds. It does not contradict the 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?

The description is three short sentences with no redundant filler. The main action is front-loaded, the source of the id is included, and the 30-second propagation detail is valuable and compact.

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 single-parameter delete operation with an output schema and clear annotations, this description is complete. It explains permanence, source of the id, the effect on protected translations, and cost, leaving no critical ambiguity for invocation.

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 schema already fully documents the only parameter, including its type and source. The description repeats the 'from list_terms or add_terms' guidance but does not add meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 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?

The description states a specific action ('Permanently delete') on a specific resource ('one account term') and identifies how to get the id. It clearly differentiates from sibling tools like list_terms and add_terms by focusing on deletion.

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 clearly implies when to use the tool: when a specific account term must be deleted, with the id sourced from list_terms or add_terms. It does not explicitly name alternatives not to use, but the deletion purpose is unambiguous given the sibling set.

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