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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond that: this is a deferred, two-phase deletion gated on owner confirmation in the browser holding the management key, revealing an auth/workflow constraint the annotations do not convey.

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 tight sentences with zero filler; the deferred-deletion behavior is front-loaded right after the purpose statement.

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?

The description adequately covers the destructive workflow and its confirmation gate, which is the hardest part. It remains incomplete on parameter semantics (undocumented confirm_delete) and offers no return information, though no output schema exists to compensate.

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% across two parameters, so the burden falls on the description. It only alludes to an 'existing preview' (preview_id) and never explains confirm_delete, its required const=true value, or the management key, leaving the parameters essentially undocumented.

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 and resource ('Prepare deletion of an existing preview'), distinguishing it from siblings like create_preview and update_preview. The 'prepare' framing signals a two-phase operation, though the name delete_preview could momentarily suggest an immediate delete.

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 rather than stated: the description explains that deletion only completes after owner confirmation, which is important context for when the call is appropriate. However, it names no alternatives or explicit conditions for choosing this over update_preview or other siblings.

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