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

The description goes beyond the destructiveHint annotation by explaining the permanent nature, the deletion of all versions, and the fact that member resources are untouched. This gives users a precise understanding of the operation's effects.

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 concise and well-structured, consisting of short, direct sentences. Every sentence adds important information without unnecessary fluff.

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 simple schema and destructive nature, the description covers all necessary context: what is deleted, what is not affected, the irreversibility, and the alternative action. No important information is missing.

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 already describes app_id as 'the app id to delete permanently', so the parameter is clear. The description adds useful context about scope and side effects, though it does not significantly alter the parameter meaning itself.

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 is to permanently delete an app and all its versions. It also distinguishes this from unpublish_app, which merely hides the app. The resource and scope are unambiguous.

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 warns that the operation cannot be undone and clarifies that only the app is deleted while member resources remain. It also directs users to unpublish_app when the intent is to hide rather than delete, providing clear usage guidance.

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