Delete Workspace

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

The annotations already mark this as destructive (destructiveHint: true) and not read-only, so the bar for extra context is lower. The description adds the scope requirement but does not mention irreversibility, cascading deletions, or side effects, which would have been beneficial.

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 that front-loads the core action and resource. It contains no filler or unnecessary detail, making it optimally efficient.

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 simple delete operation with a single slug input and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks context about what happens on success or failure, or whether deletion is permanent, relying on the destructive annotation to imply consequences.

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 schema provides no description for 'workspaceSlug', and the tool description does not explain what this parameter represents or how it should be formatted. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate, leaving the parameter meaning entirely implicit.

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 the action ('Delete') and the resource ('workspace'), and it distinguishes this tool from siblings like updateWorkspace or createWorkspace. The phrase 'requires full scope' adds a specific precondition that helps identify when this tool is appropriate.

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 mentions a scope requirement but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or when to avoid it. It is implied by the purpose, but there is no direct guidance on selection among the many sibling tools.

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