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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine value beyond them by describing the cascade ('stop its waiting articles') and the boundary ('Articles already written stay'), which an agent could not infer from 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?

Two short sentences with zero filler, and the primary action is front-loaded ahead of the secondary side-effect detail.

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 two-parameter mutation with no output schema and full annotation coverage, the description supplies the important side effects. The remaining gap is the unresolved 'at least one identifier' requirement, plus no pointer to list_articles_orders or get_articles_order for finding the key.

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 0% and both parameters are optional with null defaults, so the description's 'by order_id or order_uuid' is the only semantic guidance available and is therefore useful. However, it does not resolve whether one identifier is required, which takes precedence when both are supplied, or likely formats.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('Delete an article order') and even specifies the two lookup keys. It is clearly distinct from delete_article and edit_articles_order, though it never explicitly contrasts with them.

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?

Usage is implied by the name and the identifier hint, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of edit_articles_order as the alternative for modifying rather than removing, and no prerequisites noted.

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