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

Annotations already declare destructive, idempotent, non-read-only, open-world behavior, so the bar is lower. The description adds a permission prerequisite ('Requires edit permission'), which is real context not present in annotations, though it doesn't say what happens when the named table is missing.

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, front-loaded with the operation, then name sourcing, then permission requirement. No filler or redundancy.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the permission and name-source details cover the key preconditions for a destructive call. Minor gap: no mention of behavior when the pivot table name doesn't exist.

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 only 50%: pivot_table_name is documented ('Name of the report to delete') but file_uuid has no description in either schema or prose. The description's pointer to files_context/files_set_pivot_table as name sources adds useful semantics beyond the schema, but the undocumented file_uuid keeps this at baseline.

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 and resource ('Deletes a PivotTable by name'), which cleanly separates it from files_delete, files_delete_chart, and files_set_pivot_table. An agent can identify the exact operation without opening the 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?

Tells the agent where valid pivot_table_name values come from (files_context or files_set_pivot_table) and that edit permission is required. It doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives or describe failure behavior, but the sourcing hint is concrete routing guidance.

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