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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It explicitly states irreversibility ('cannot be undone'), the unique edit_key requirement, and that the slug is never reused—valuable behavioral context for a destructive operation.

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 with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, followed by a requirement and consequences. Every sentence adds factual value, and the structure is easy to parse quickly.

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 two-parameter delete tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential context: what it does, what is required, and the permanent consequences. It lacks error-condition context and a small terminology inconsistency ('post' vs 'page'), but it is otherwise sufficient for an agent to invoke it safely.

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 50%: edit_key has a schema description, but slug does not. The description adds that the slug is never reused, which is more behavioral than semantic, and it reinforces the edit_key requirement. However, it does not clarify what the slug itself identifies or how it should be formatted, leaving a partial gap.

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 states a specific action ('Permanently delete') and a resource ('a post'), which is clear even though the tool is named 'page' rather than 'post'. It differentiates from the siblings create_page, get_page, and update_page, leaving no doubt about the operation.

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?

It gives a key prerequisite ('Requires the edit_key') and important consequences, but it never explicitly says when to choose this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. Usage context is implied by the verb and sibling names, not stated directly.

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