delete_post

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It reveals that the operation is destructive, scoped to the authenticated user's own posts, and identifies exactly what is being removed. It does not explicitly state irreversibility or side effects, but the verb 'Delete' plus the ownership constraint provides solid transparency for a simple mutation 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 description is one tightly constructed sentence with the action front-loaded, followed by a necessary parameter clarification. There is no redundant or filler content.

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 mutation tool with an output schema, the description covers the core operation, ownership scope, and parameter format. It could add explicit note about irreversibility or permission requirements, but the existing content is sufficient for safe invocation in most cases.

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 0%, and the schema only labels the parameter as 'Post'. The description adds essential semantic meaning by defining post as 'a post URN or a linkedin.com post URL', giving the agent the exact accepted formats for the only required parameter.

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 a specific action ('Delete') and a specific resource ('one of the user's own posts'), which clearly distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like create_post, comment_on_post, and like_post. The ownership qualifier adds precision and prevents confusion with operations on other users' posts.

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 phrase 'user's own posts' clearly conveys when this tool is appropriate, implicitly excluding deletion of other users' posts or interacting with posts via like/comment tools. It does not explicitly name alternatives or provide when-not-to-use conditions, but the context is strong enough for an agent to route correctly.

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