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

The destructiveHint annotation already signals a destructive operation, and the description adds no further behavioral context such as irreversibility, cascading effects, permission requirements, or impact on related records. It simply restates 'Delete' without going beyond what the annotation already conveys.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is efficient but adds little explanatory depth, so it earns a 4 rather than a 5.

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?

The tool is simple: one required parameter and no output schema, so the description plus annotations and schema are minimally sufficient to identify the call. However, it leaves out what the response looks like, whether deletion has cascading consequences, and any usage guidance for choosing this tool among related siblings.

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?

There is one parameter, site_id, and the schema already describes it as 'Site ID' with 100% coverage. The description adds the phrase 'for a site' but provides no additional meaning, format requirements, or edge-case context.

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 uses a clear verb ('Delete') and names a specific resource ('Cookie Solution for a site'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like delete_privacy_cookie_policy and update_cookie_solution. However, it mostly restates the tool name and title, so it stops just short of a 5.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool rather than alternatives. The sibling list includes create, update, get, and delete variants, but the description never mentions them or any conditions that would select this tool over another.

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