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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true, but the description adds substantial context: deletion is irreversible, it removes anyone's comment on Instagram/Facebook but only the connected account's replies on Threads/Bluesky. This goes well beyond the hint flag and accurately describes what gets destroyed.

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?

Four sentences cover purpose, irreversibility, platform differences, and an alternative recommendation with no filler. The most critical fact ('cannot be undone') is front-loaded, and the description is efficiently ordered.

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 destructive tool with no output schema and a simple flat parameter set, the description is complete: it covers irreversibility, platform-scoped behavior, support lookup via list_platforms, and the hide_reply fallback. The agent has everything needed to decide when and how to invoke this tool 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 description coverage is 100%, with postId, replyId, and workspaceId all documented inline. The tool description adds no new parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('Delete a comment for good') and distinguishes itself from hide_reply, which is the key sibling it could be confused with. It also explains channel-specific behavior (Instagram/Facebook vs Threads/Bluesky), making its purpose unmistakable.

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?

Explicitly says 'This is not hide_reply' and advises 'Prefer hide_reply when the person just wants it out of sight,' giving a clear when-not-to-use and alternative. It also directs the agent to list_platforms to determine channel support, providing actionable selection guidance.

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