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

The destructiveHint annotation already signals a write/destroy operation, and the description adds the non-obvious detail that the action is irreversible and the exact endpoint it maps to. It stops short of stating auth/API-key requirements or what happens to already-deleted ids.

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?

Three short sentences, no padding, with the destructive nature and the reason to use it front-loaded ahead of the endpoint trivia. Every sentence 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?

For a one-parameter destructive tool with annotations covering safety and no output schema, the description is essentially complete. Only fringe details (auth requirement, response on already-deleted ids) are absent.

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 100% for the single response_id parameter, so the schema already carries the parameter meaning; the description only reinforces it via the singular 'one survey response'. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb (delete) plus resource and scope (one survey response), and the endpoint line pins down exactly which API operation this is. An agent can distinguish it from formbricks_get_response, formbricks_list_responses, and formbricks_delete_webhook without opening any schema.

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?

Gives a concrete motivating scenario — honouring a data-deletion request — which tells the agent when this tool is the right choice. It does not name an explicit alternative or state when not to use it, but for a uniquely-scoped delete operation there is little ambiguity to resolve.

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