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 known. The description adds meaningful context beyond annotations: answers are deleted too, and the action is recoverable through history. It does not discuss permissions or confirmation 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?

A single compact sentence that front-loads the destructive action and appends the recovery caveat. Every clause carries useful information with no filler.

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 description covers the core behavior, cascade effect, and recoverability, which is adequate for a simple one-parameter delete tool. However, it leaves the required 'id' parameter unexplained and gives no guidance on when deletion is appropriate versus alternatives.

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?

The single parameter 'id' has 0% schema description coverage, so the description must explain it but does not. It never states that 'id' is the survey identifier or what form it takes, leaving the only parameter undocumented.

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: deletes a survey including its answers. It is clearly distinguishable from save_survey/list_surveys, though it does not explicitly contrast with siblings like delete_board or undo_change.

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?

Usage is implied by the destructive verb and mention that the deletion is recoverable via history. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no reference to alternatives such as undo_change or list_history.

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