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 structurally. The word 'Permanently' usefully reinforces irreversibility, but the description says nothing about side effects such as what happens to posts or comments referencing the deleted media, or whether authorization beyond the ID is required.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the verb, resource, and key constraint; there is no filler and nothing to trim.

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 one-parameter destructive tool with annotations covering the safety profile and no output schema, this is nearly sufficient. The only meaningful omission is downstream impact on content that references the deleted media.

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% for the single mediaId parameter, so the baseline is 3. 'By its ID' adds no format, source, or validation detail beyond what the schema already states.

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 gives a specific verb ('delete'), resource ('uploaded media file'), and lookup key ('by its ID'), which clearly separates it from delete_post and cancel_post in the sibling list. It stops short of explicitly naming an alternative, but the resource 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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g., ownership or workspace scoping), and no mention of alternatives such as list_media for locating the ID first. Usage must be inferred entirely from the tool name and description.

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