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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that deletion goes to the recycle bin, is recoverable for the tenant's retention window, and advises confirming with the user first. It does not detail side effects like folder contents or permissions, but the key recovery behavior is covered.

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 concise sentences, each adding meaningful information: action, recovery behavior, contrast with GDrive, and user-confirmation guidance. No fluff or repetition.

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 is simple, but itemId provenance is a notable omission: an agent is not told to get it from list_onedrive_items or search_onedrive_items. The description is otherwise suitable for a straightforward delete operation with no output schema.

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?

Only mailbox has a schema description; itemId is an undocumented bare string. The description does not explain what itemId refers to or how to obtain it, so the 50% schema coverage gap is not compensated at all.

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 the specific action 'Delete a OneDrive file or folder' with a clear resource and scope. It also distinguishes itself from the Google Drive equivalent, and the name aligns with the behavior.

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?

Provides clear context by contrasting with the 'Google Drive equivalent which is permanent', helping an agent choose between delete_onedrive_item and delete_gdrive_item. It does not explicitly list all alternatives or state exhaustive when-not conditions, but the context is strong.

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