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

While annotations already flag destructiveHint and idempotentHint, the description adds non-obvious consequences the annotations cannot convey: the live site stops serving, the slug remains held, retention is 30 days, and repeated calls return the same dates. That is exactly the extra context an agent needs before triggering a destructive action.

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?

Two dense sentences, front-loaded with the action and its consequences, then authorization and idempotency. Nothing is wasted and nothing important is buried.

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 output schema covers return values (the dates), and the description covers the destructive consequences, retention period, authorization, and idempotency. An agent has everything needed to decide and call correctly.

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 100%, so both parameters (bundleId accepted in id/slug/URL forms, and the unrecorded 'why') are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond the owner/admin authorization note, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 with its exact semantics: 'Move a bundle to the trash for 30 days.' The soft-delete framing plus 'slug stays held' distinguishes it from a hard delete and implicitly from trash_purge/trash_restore without needing to name them.

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?

Gives a clear precondition ('The owner or a platform admin') and the 30-day window that tells an agent this is recoverable, which is the key usage consideration. It stops short of explicitly naming the alternative tools (trash_restore for undo, trash_purge for permanent removal).

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