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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds important context beyond them: the delete is a soft-delete, it cascades over the lead's submissions, and it is scoped to the caller's merchant. This meaningfully clarifies the blast radius and tenant boundary, though it does not discuss recovery or permission requirements.

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 efficient sentence with the core action front-loaded. The parenthetical adds only relevant qualifiers: identifier options, cascade behavior, and merchant scope.

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 two-parameter destructive delete tool with no output schema, the description covers the action, lookup keys, cascade impact, and tenant scope. The main remaining gap is the lack of explicit guidance on the optional/mutually exclusive nature of lead_id and lead_uuid.

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 0%, so the description must explain the parameters. It identifies that a lead is found by lead_id or lead_uuid, which gives each parameter a role, but it does not say whether exactly one is required, whether they are mutually exclusive, or which takes precedence if both are supplied.

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 a lead) and adds scope and cascade behavior. It implicitly distinguishes this from delete_lead_submit by stating that deleting a lead cascades over its submissions, so an agent can tell the two deletion tools apart.

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 usage is implied by the purpose: use this to delete a lead. However, the description does not explicitly say when to use it versus alternatives such as delete_lead_submit, edit_lead, or publish_lead, and it gives no when-not conditions.

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