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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so irreversibility is covered. The description adds real value by naming the side-effect target (~/.polopan/region.json), but omits what happens if the ID is unknown or if the address is currently the default.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with no filler. Every element earns its place.

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-param destructive tool with full annotation coverage, a complete schema, and no output schema, the description supplies what the structured fields do not: the persistence location. Only missing edge-case behavior keeps it from a 5.

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 address_id parameter is documented in the schema, so baseline 3 applies. The description adds no format, source, or lookup detail beyond 'by ID'.

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), a specific resource (a saved delivery address), the selector (by ID), and the storage target. It is clearly distinguishable from address.save, address.set_default, and address.list_saved without opening any 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?

Use case is implied by the intent — remove a saved address — but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusion conditions, and no pointer to alternatives such as address.set_default for merely changing the default rather than deleting.

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