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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description's clarification that the paragraph is not deleted adds useful context beyond the schema. However, it does not disclose other potential side effects or error behaviors, despite the openWorldHint=true annotation. The added context is minimal but not contradictory.

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 short but contains redundant repetition: the main sentence is immediately repeated under 'Guidance'. This wastes words and reduces efficiency. The first sentence is clear and front-loaded, but the duplication is unnecessary.

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 three fully documented parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but minimal. It covers the key behavioral distinction (not deleting the paragraph) but omits any mention of error cases, reversibility, or idempotency, which the annotations (idempotentHint=false) only partially address.

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%, so each parameter is already documented. The description does not add any meaning beyond listing the context parameter names, which is redundant. The baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema carries the parameter documentation.

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 clearly states the action ('Deletes a given paragraph media') and the specific resource, distinguishing it from sibling delete tools like shop_delete_paragraph. It also adds a key clarification that the associated paragraph is not deleted, which further defines the scope.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions. It only states what it does, leaving the agent to infer when it is appropriate.

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