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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful scope information beyond the annotations: "Reports already built from it are not changed," clarifying that the blast radius is limited to the template itself. It omits auth/permission requirements and the confirm-preview flow.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action, then impact, then usage constraint. No filler; every sentence carries distinct information.

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 delete with no output schema, the definition covers purpose, side-effect scope, and usage constraint, while annotations carry the safety profile. It leaves the confirm/preview mechanism entirely to the schema, which is acceptable but marginally incomplete.

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 50%: the `confirm` parameter is fully documented in the schema, while `name` has no schema description. The description's phrase "by name" identifies the key selector, but adds no format or matching details beyond the schema's maxLength constraint, so it only marginally compensates for the gap.

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 (Delete), resource (saved report template), and scope (one, by name). The verb cleanly separates it from the sibling read/list/save template tools, so an agent can tell what this does without opening the schema.

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?

"Only when the person asks to delete that template" gives an explicit when-to-use constraint, which is strong guidance for a destructive action. It does not, however, name an alternative sibling or a when-not-to-use case beyond the implicit one.

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