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

Annotations already include destructiveHint=true, confirming destructive nature. The description adds context about permanence and provides an alternative for hiding. No contradictions with 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 sentences: first states purpose with examples, second provides alternative and requirements. Front-loaded and efficient, though could be slightly more structured.

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?

Covers key aspects: action, entities, alternative, prerequisites. No output schema exists, so return value not expected, but the description could mention irreversibility more explicitly (already implied by 'permanent').

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 description must compensate. It lists the three required parameters and notes the host requirement, but does not elaborate on each parameter's meaning or format beyond what is in the schema. Some value added but limited.

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 states 'Permanently delete a production item' and lists many entity types, making the action specific. It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'update_production_item' which hides instead of deletes.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool (for permanent deletion) and when not ('To merely hide it, use update_production_item active:false instead'). It also lists prerequisites: 'Requires event_id + entity + item_id; you must be a host.'

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