delete_quizzes

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

Even though annotations already mark destructiveHint=true, the description adds substantial behavioral detail: which questions are owned versus shared, that question-bank assignments are removed but banks remain untouched, the separate content.delete capability requirement, and the instruction to act only on explicit user request. This goes far beyond the annotations and gives the agent a precise mental model of side effects.

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 compact yet information-dense, with the most critical warnings front-loaded ('DESTRUCTIVE', 'BATCH operation'). The structured breakdown of deleted, removed, and untouched items makes complex side-effect semantics easy to parse without wasted words.

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 batch operation with a single parameter and an output schema, the description is fully adequate. It covers required permissions, batch semantics, ownership rules, shared-bank exclusions, and the requirement for explicit user consent, leaving no critical gap for correct invocation.

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 0%, so the description carries the entire burden, and it fully compensates. It specifies that quiz_ids must be obfuscated Skilljar quiz ids, that a list is required even for one quiz, and that the operation is batch-oriented, all of which adds meaning beyond the raw array-of-strings schema.

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 opens with 'Delete one or more quizzes', a specific verb and resource, and immediately flags the operation as DESTRUCTIVE and BATCH. It goes further to distinguish this from related deletion tools by spelling out exactly what is deleted, removed, and left untouched.

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 gives clear context for when this tool is appropriate: batch deletion of quizzes on explicit user instruction, with required auth scopes and capability clearly stated. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives like delete_questions or unbind_quiz_question_banks, but its ownership explanation effectively tells the agent when quiz deletion is or is not the right operation.

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