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 carried structurally. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that: it does not say whether deletion is permanent or reversible, whether it cascades (e.g. to scheduled posts referencing the media), or whether it requires elevated permissions.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with zero padding. The verb and the discriminator (by ID) come first.

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 string param, no output schema, no nesting) and annotations carry the destructive signal, so little prose is needed. However, for a permanent destructive operation on media, the absence of any statement about irreversibility or side effects leaves a meaningful gap.

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 the single parameter is fully documented as "The media ID to delete." The description's "by ID" merely restates the schema, so the baseline 3 applies with no added semantics.

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 media file") with the identifying parameter, so the agent can distinguish it from update_media, upload_media, and list_media. It does not explicitly name or contrast with those siblings, but the operation is unambiguous.

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?

"by ID" implies an ID must already be known (presumably from list_media), but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives or how to recover the ID. Nothing tells the agent when deletion is appropriate versus updating.

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