delete_message

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the important behavioral constraint that only the bot's own messages can be deleted. It does not describe other traits like permanence, error behavior, or effects on replies, but for a simple delete operation, this level is adequate.

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, front-loaded sentence that communicates the action and the key constraint without any fluff. The '[Official API]' prefix is minor but does not detract. 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?

This is a low-complexity tool with one well-documented parameter and no output schema. The description covers the essential operational constraint (own messages only), which is arguably the most critical information for correct invocation. It is sufficiently complete for the tool's simplicity, though it could mention success/failure behavior.

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% (message_id is described as 'Message ID (om_xxx)'). The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 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 the tool's action ('Recall/delete a message') and specifies the resource ('message'). It also includes a key scoping constraint ('bot can only delete its own messages'), which distinguishes it from other message-related tools like update_message or forward_message.

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 provides a clear limitation ('bot can only delete its own messages'), which implicitly guides when the tool can be used. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., update_message for editing) or provide exclusions beyond the ownership constraint.

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