post_knowledge_base_bulk_delete_route

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the write/safety profile is mostly carried structurally. The description adds nothing on top: it does not warn that non-forced deletes fail or skip documents in use, that forcing detaches them from dependent agents, or that folder deletion cascades to children — all of which the schema's 'force' text implies but the description never surfaces.

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 short fragment that wastes no words, but it is essentially a restatement of the tool name/title rather than a front-loaded summary with content. It is under-specified rather than genuinely concise.

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 destructive bulk operation touching a knowledge base used by agents, the description should at minimum mention the force/non-force behavior and the cascading effect on dependent agents. With no output schema and no usage context, the description leaves the agent without the operational picture it needs.

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%; the 'force' parameter and 'document_ids' are both fully documented in the schema. The description contributes no additional parameter meaning, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 names a specific verb ('Bulk Delete') and resource ('Knowledge Base Documents'), so the operation is unambiguous. However, it does nothing to distinguish itself from the sibling 'delete_knowledge_base_document' (singular delete) or 'post_knowledge_base_bulk_move_route', leaving the agent to infer that 'bulk' is the differentiating trait.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this bulk tool versus the single-document delete sibling, nor any prerequisite (e.g., checking dependent agents first with get_knowledge_base_bulk_dependent_agents_route). The agent gets only the purpose statement and must infer usage entirely.

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