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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds real value by enumerating the cascade: baseline, retained change events, and feed link are all destroyed, and the action is permanent. It does not cover authorization requirements beyond workspace ownership or any irreversibility recovery note, keeping it short of a 5.

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, no filler, with the destructive cascade and the permanence/scope constraints front-loaded. Every clause carries information an agent needs before invoking.

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?

With an output schema present and rich annotations, the description supplies the cascade effects and the intent requirement, which is enough to call the tool correctly. A minor gap is the lack of clarification against the near-identically named delete_saved_search_workspace sibling.

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% and the single id parameter already documents its origin (create_saved_search / list_saved_searches) and ownership constraint. The description adds no parameter syntax or format detail beyond that, so the baseline 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 (permanently delete) and resource (one saved search), and scopes it to the authenticated private workspace. It is distinguishable in intent from create_saved_search or list_saved_searches, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with the sibling delete_saved_search_workspace, which sounds like it covers overlapping territory.

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?

'Requires explicit user intent' plus the negative scope ('does not delete other searches or public records') implies when this is appropriate, but there is no routing to an alternative such as delete_saved_search_workspace for other ownership contexts. Usage is implied rather than stated against a named alternative.

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