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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true. The description adds critical details: permanent removal, condition on shared bytes, no recovery path, and 404 with existence masking. No contradiction with 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?

Four sentences, each providing necessary information: action, effect, error case, return value. No redundancy. Front-loaded with the core action.

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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (1 param, no output schema shown but description gives return JSON), the description is fully sufficient. It covers behavior, errors, and result.

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?

Only one parameter (image_id) with schema description already explaining it. The description references 'by id' but doesn't add new semantic context. Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline 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 clearly states it hard-deletes a hosted image by id. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like `delete_image_generator` by specifying the resource. The verb 'delete' and resource 'image' are explicit.

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?

It mentions ownership requirement and permanent deletion, implying when not to use (if you don't own the image or want recovery). It also notes existence masking, which is important context. However, it does not explicitly list alternatives for similar actions.

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