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

Adds substantial behavior beyond the destructiveHint annotation: the deletion is irreversible, the link 404s immediately on every site, recreating an embed produces a new link, and the action leaves a history entry. This is exactly the kind of consequence information an agent needs before invoking a destructive tool.

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 critical information is front-loaded and packed into one dense sentence. It is efficient overall, though the parenthetical ticket number and trailing history note add slight bulk without much operational value.

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 a rich destructiveHint annotation and a fully documented schema, the description covers effect, reversibility, permission requirement, and audit behavior. No essential calling context 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and the schema explains that embedId comes from list_wiki_embeds. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 action and resource: taking down a wiki page's scene embed. It goes further by describing the immediate effect (the link answers 404 everywhere), which clearly separates it from update_wiki_embed, create_wiki_embed, and list_wiki_embeds.

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 clear authorization condition: only for somebody who may edit the page. Usage context is therefore clear, but it does not explicitly name alternatives such as update_wiki_embed or state when not to use deletion.

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