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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The word 'permanently' explicitly communicates that the deletion is irreversible, which is crucial for an agent deciding whether to invoke this destructive tool. This goes beyond the tool name and provides important safety information.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no redundant words. It efficiently conveys the action, permanence, target document types, and the required parameter.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential context: what is deleted, what types, and that it is permanent. It could benefit from mentioning potential limitations (e.g., cannot delete non-document resources), but the clarity of the description makes the tool's function sufficiently complete for an agent.

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 input schema already provides 100% coverage for the single parameter 'id' with the description 'Document ID'. The tool description's phrase 'by ID' merely restates the schema without adding additional meaning, such as ID format, source, or validation rules. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema carries the semantic weight.

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 (permanently delete), the resource (a document), and specifies the document types (doc, word, note). It also distinguishes this from sibling delete_sheet and delete_slide_presentation tools by explicitly targeting documents.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this should be used only for documents, nor does it reference the sibling tools for deleting sheets or presentations. The only usage context is the requirement to provide an ID, which is a parameter prerequisite, not usage guidance.

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