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

The annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, so the description adds no new behavioral context beyond that. It does not disclose the permanence of deletion, side effects on related data, or any irreversibility, which is significant for a destructive operation with no annotations covering those details.

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 description is a single concise sentence, front-loaded with the verb and object. It is efficient with no wasted words, but the brevity sacrifices critical detail.

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?

With no output schema and minimal annotations, the description is too sparse. It omits confirmation of deletion, error handling, and the requirement for the token, making it inadequate for a destructive tool with two parameters.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must explain the parameters. It merely lists 'id' and 'owner token' without elaboration, failing to clarify what 'id' refers to (form ID?) or the token's role, leaving the agent without essential parameter semantics.

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 the verb 'delete' and the resources 'form and its responses', which is clear. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling 'collect_close_form' or other delete tools like 'droplink_delete_document', leaving the agent to infer the distinct use case.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites like needing the owner token or when deletion is appropriate, leaving the agent without context for selection.

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