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

Goes well beyond the destructiveHint annotation by explaining token lifecycle, invalid placeholder tokens, preview-before-posting, confirmWrite semantics, and that passing preflight is not confirmation. This gives the agent a precise model of the tool's safety behavior.

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 dense but not bloated. Each sentence contributes to the confirmation model or token invariants, though a shorter phrasing for the confirmation workflow could improve readability without losing 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 destructive transactional tool with a confirmation requirement, the description is largely complete: it covers token validity, failure mode without confirmWrite, and the explicit-confirmation rule. It lacks a clear statement about the successful return value, and confirmDelete semantics are unexplained, but the core invocation contract is well covered.

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 description adds meaningful semantics beyond the schema for routeToken and confirmWrite, clarifying that routeToken does not bypass confirmation and that confirmWrite applies only the previewed change. However, the confirmDelete parameter is present in the schema but never explained in the description, leaving a minor semantic gap.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Deletes a BRC sales rep by id'. This clearly distinguishes it from update/create/list siblings and states the primary action and target.

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?

Provides explicit workflow guidance: requires a valid routeToken, is allowed only after preview and explicit confirmation, and confirmWrite must be true only after user confirmation. It does not explicitly compare to alternative deletion/update siblings, but the conditions for using this tool and its confirmation flow are clearly stated.

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