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

The description goes beyond the destructiveHint annotation by explaining the soft-delete nature, the release of the primary phone for reuse, and the retention of audit history. This provides meaningful behavioral context about the tool's side effects, which annotations alone do not convey.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action. Every phrase adds value: 'soft-delete' clarifies the operation, and the second sentence explains key consequences. No filler or redundant information.

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 one-parameter deletion tool, the description fully explains the operation's nature (soft-delete) and its key effects (phone reuse, audit retention). An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. The description is complete and self-contained.

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 schema fully describes the single parameter 'accountId' with its purpose. The description adds no additional semantics about the parameter format, constraints, or behaviors beyond what the schema already states. Baseline of 3 is appropriate given 100% schema coverage.

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 'Soft-delete a CRM account/customer' with a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from other delete_* tools by focusing on the account entity. It also adds the consequence of releasing the primary phone, which is unique to this operation.

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 implies usage through 'soft-delete' and 'keeping account history for audit,' suggesting when to use it (retaining history), but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools like update_account or hard-delete options. No exclusions or alternatives are named.

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