vrchat_delete

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

The annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the agent knows this is a destructive operation. The description adds 'DELETE operation' which aligns but provides no additional behavioral context about auth requirements, irreversibility, or rate limits.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. The first sentence defines the purpose, and the second provides actionable guidance. Perfectly concise for a generic proxy tool.

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?

Given the tool is a generic wrapper with 5 parameters including nested objects and an output schema exists, the description is minimal but functional. It relies heavily on external tools (vrchat_operations) for full context, which is reasonable for a generated API client, but could offer more about what the operation does.

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%, so the schema already documents each parameter. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema's descriptions and only directs to other tools for details. 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?

The description clearly states it calls a DELETE operation by operationId, which is a specific verb+resource. However, it does not differentiate from specific delete tools like vrchat_event_delete, relying on the agent to infer that this is a generic tool for any discovered DELETE operation.

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 tells the agent to use vrchat_operations and vrchat_operation_details to discover parameters, providing context for how to prepare the call. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs. specific delete alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites.

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