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

Annotations already signal destructiveness, but the description adds crucial nuance: default deletion is recoverable via trash, while permanent: true is immediate and irreversible. This goes beyond the scalar hints and gives the agent the safety-relevant behavioral context it needs.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the destructive warning is placed immediately after the default behavior. Every sentence earns its place.

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 two-parameter tool with full schema coverage, a rich output schema, and destructive annotations, the description covers the essential behavior and the irreversible edge case. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 the schema already documents both site_id and permanent in full detail. The description restates the permanent behavior rather than adding new parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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: 'Delete a site.' The description distinguishes this from delete_site_files by targeting the site object itself, and clarifies two clear modes (trash vs. permanent). An agent can identify what this tool operates on without ambiguity.

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 clear guidance on when to use the permanent flag vs. the default trash behavior, which is the main decision point. It does not explicitly compare against sibling tools like delete_site_files, but the object-level scope is clear from the description and title.

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