Discard a report preview

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds beyond annotations by clarifying that the token is invalidated and that no CamCORS record is changed, confirming the non-destructive read-only nature.

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, clear sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose and a critical side effect (no record changed). It wastes no words, though it could be slightly more structured with explicit labeling.

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 single parameter, existing annotations, and absence of an output schema, the description is largely complete. It covers what the tool does, what it does not do, and a key behavioral trait (token invalidation). Minor gaps remain in parameter explanation.

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 has 0% description coverage for the single 'token' parameter. The description mentions 'its token' but does not explain that the token represents the preview identifier or its role, leaving the agent to infer from context. More detail would help.

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 closes and invalidates an unused preview (edit, submission, or deletion) and notes that no record is changed. The verb 'close' and resource 'report preview' are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like 'camcors_discard_preview' by specifying the preview types.

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 indicates the tool is for unused previews, implying proper usage when a preview should be discarded. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it (e.g., for submitting or editing) or provide alternatives among siblings.

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