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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description adds the plan requirement ('Requires the Scale plan or higher'), which is a behavioral constraint not covered by annotations. It also clarifies the scope of deletion ('entirely'), providing context beyond the schema. This adds meaningful value without contradicting annotations.

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?

The description is two short sentences with no redundant information. The action and key requirement are front-loaded, making it efficient and easy to scan. Every word contributes to clarity.

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 simple delete operation with an output schema present, the description covers the essential details: the action, the resource scope, and a plan prerequisite. The destructive and idempotent nature is already handled by annotations, so no additional behavioral disclosure is needed. It is complete for an agent to correctly invoke the tool.

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%, with both courseId and translationId having descriptive text in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies as the schema fully documents the parameters.

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 states a specific verb ('Deletes') and a clear resource ('a locale entirely'), which directly identifies the tool's function. It distinguishes from sibling delete tools like delete_course by specifying 'locale' as the target, making it unambiguous for an agent to select the correct operation.

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?

The description provides the context that this tool deletes a translation/locale and notes the Scale plan requirement, which indicates a prerequisite. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives such as update_translation or list_translations, nor does it state when not to use it. The usage is implied rather than fully specified.

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