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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does disclose the two critical traits: irreversibility ('No restore') and the preview-approval gate. It omits partial-failure behavior, whether deletion is atomic across the 500 ids, and any permission requirements.

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?

Three terse clauses, front-loaded with the destructive action and its blast radius, then the safety gate. Every clause carries load-bearing information.

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, 2-required-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the irreversibility and approval precondition are the essentials and are present. It is still thin on outcome reporting and failure semantics an agent would need before firing an irreversible 500-record delete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. 'Up to 500 contacts of one search' does convey the ids cap and the single-search constraint, but neither parameter is named, and it never states that ids are person identifiers or that search_id is the UUID returned by sdr_create_search.

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, resource and binding scope: removing up to 500 contacts belonging to a single search. It is distinguishable from the single-record sdr_delete_person only by inference from 'contacts of one search' and the bulk/preview pairing, never stated explicitly.

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 hard prerequisite — 'Only after sdr_preview_bulk_delete_people was approved' — which tells the agent exactly when it is allowed to call this. It does not say when to prefer sdr_delete_person or sdr_delete_search instead, so the routing guidance is incomplete.

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