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

While annotations mark the operation as destructive, the description adds significant behavioral depth by detailing the side effects: it retains historical calls, transcripts, and billing, and explicitly avoids canceling numbers or modifying sibling agents. This provides essential context beyond the structured hints.

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 text is highly efficient. It front-loads the primary function and quickly follows up with critical context (what is retained, what is excluded), ensuring no sentence is unnecessary.

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?

Given the single-parameter input and the destructive nature of the task, the description is complete. It covers the scope of deletion, necessary user interaction, and the resulting state of the surrounding system components.

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?

The schema coverage is 0%, meaning the description must compensate for the input parameter definition. However, the description does not provide any semantic meaning or constraints for the required 'agent_id' parameter, so it stays at the minimum viable score.

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 clearly and specifically states the tool's purpose: 'Permanently remove one unused AI agent.' It also defines the boundaries of the operation by stating what it does not affect, helping distinguish it from other agent management tools.

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 crucial usage guidance by setting preconditions and workflow constraints. It specifies that the agent must be 'unused,' and explicitly instructs the agent to 'Ask the user to confirm before calling,' preventing accidental destructive action.

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