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

The annotation set already declares destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds the return behavior 'Returns true on success' and names the resource being destroyed, which is consistent with the annotations but not substantially richer than them.

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 sentence that front-loads the action and then states the return behavior. There is no filler or redundant wording.

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 one-parameter deletion tool with strong annotations and an output schema, the description is complete. It states what is deleted and what the successful result is, with no missing operational detail.

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 covers the single parameter 'id' with a clear description, reaching 100% coverage. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 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 uses the specific verb 'Deletes' and identifies the exact resource, 'Open Graph image configuration'. This clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling delete_proxy and delete_storage_destination, as well as from create_og_config, update_og_config, and list_og_configs.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as update_og_config or create_og_config. There is also no mention of prerequisites or side effects beyond the deletion itself, leaving usage context implied rather than explicit.

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