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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, so the description's 'Permanently delete' reinforces this. It adds the refusal behavior for scheduled/published posts, which is beyond the annotation scope and valuable context for the agent. 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, no filler. The primary action is front-loaded, and the exception/alternative is stated succinctly in the second sentence. Every word earns its place.

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 tool has an output schema, so return values are covered elsewhere. The description covers the core action, the refusal condition, and the alternative. For a simple destructive tool with a single parameter, this is complete.

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%, and the description does not mention the postId parameter at all. The single parameter is self-explanatory by name, but the description provides no additional meaning or constraints beyond the schema's type and minLength. Given the low coverage, the description should compensate but does not.

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 the action: 'Permanently delete a draft post.' It specifies the resource (draft post) and the verb (delete). It also distinguishes from sibling cancel_scheduled_post by stating what it refuses to do, making it unambiguous which tool to use.

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?

Explicitly states when not to use: 'Refuses to delete posts that are scheduled or published' and provides the alternative: 'use cancel_scheduled_post for those.' This leaves no ambiguity about which tool to invoke for non-draft posts.

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