Delete keyword

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

The destructiveHint: true annotation already flags this as a destructive operation, and the description's 'Use only after the user confirms deletion' reinforces it. However, the description doesn't disclose what happens after deletion (permanence, whether it's recoverable, related data affected). The description aligns with rather than contradicts annotations.

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 short sentences, zero filler. The description is front-loaded with the core action and immediately follows with the critical usage constraint. Every word earns its place.

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 tool with a single required parameter and good annotation coverage, the description covers the essential points: what it does and the confirmation requirement. A more complete description might note that deletion is permanent or irreversible, and the idempotency_key behavior isn't explained, but the tool is relatively simple.

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 67% (keyword_id and project_id both have descriptions; idempotency_key lacks a description). The description points to keyword_id but doesn't add semantic context beyond the schema's own parameter descriptions. Baseline 3 is appropriate since schema does the heavy lifting for 2 of 3 params.

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 tool deletes one keyword by keyword id, distinguishing it from sibling tools like delete_project, delete_alert_rule, delete_webhook, etc., which target different resources. The scope ('one keyword by keyword id') is specific and unambiguous.

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 explicitly states 'Use only after the user confirms deletion', which is a clear usage constraint that can trigger confirmation workflows. However, it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives (like delete_saved_keyword for saved keywords, though the name distinction implies this).

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