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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint:true and idempotentHint:true; the description adds crucial context: 'Permanently delete', 'cannot be undone', and the identification logic. No contradiction.

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 two concise sentences. The first sentence front-loads the core purpose and effect. Every word is necessary; no redundancy.

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 simple delete tool with strong annotations and no output schema, the description fully covers all essential aspects: action, effect, identification methods, persistence, and scope. No gaps remain.

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 100% with descriptions. The tool description adds value by explaining the semantics of name vs. site_token (account requirement vs. anonymous token) and org_name optionality. This goes beyond what the schema alone provides.

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 uses a specific verb ('delete') and resource ('website'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like rename_site or publish_site. It covers the key aspects: permanent removal and stopping serving.

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 explains two identification methods (name with Valet account vs. site_token from anonymous publish) and who can delete. It implicitly tells when to use this tool (to delete) but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like updating or deprecating. Still very clear for a delete operation.

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