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

Annotations already say destructiveHint=true, but the description adds significant value by explaining the soft-delete behavior, cascade deletion of replies, the agent-key permission boundary, and the feature requirement. This goes well beyond the structured annotations.

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 three tight sentences with no filler. Each sentence adds essential operational information: the action, id source, permission constraint, cascade behavior, and prerequisite feature.

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 destructive operation with an output schema and annotations, this description is complete. It covers what the agent needs to know before calling: id origin, authorization limits, side effects on replies, and feature availability.

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 coverage is 100% and the commentId property already includes 'The comment id to delete (from list_comments).' The description repeats this id-source guidance but adds no new parameter-level information beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Soft-delete a comment'. It also clarifies the agent-facing scope ('agent-authored comments') and cascade behavior, making it easy to distinguish from siblings like update_comment or resolve_comment.

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 clear context: the id source is list_comments, only agent-authored comments can be deleted, and human comments are explicitly off-limits. It does not explicitly name alternative tools, but it gives enough when/when-not guidance for typical use.

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