Permanently delete RPG world

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description reveals that deletion cascades to all related entities, scenes, checkpoints and events, and requires an exact confirmation string. This is valuable behavioral context that prevents accidental destructive calls and explains the guardrail.

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 concise sentences deliver the key behavior, scope, and confirmation requirement without redundancy. The destructive nature is front-loaded, making it immediately visible to an agent.

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 destructiveHint annotation, two simple parameters, and no output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It explains what gets deleted, the confirmation safeguard, and how to identify the world, 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 coverage is only 50% because the confirmation parameter lacks a description. The description compensates by specifying the exact required format: 'DELETE: <world name>'. It also references list_worlds and create_world indirectly through the schema description for worldId, so the essential parameter semantics are covered.

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 uses a specific verb ('delete') and resource ('world'), and specifies the full scope of deletion ('all related entities, scenes, checkpoints and events'). This clearly differentiates it from siblings like update_world and create_world, making the tool's purpose 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 clearly implies this is the tool for permanently removing an entire world, and the confirmation requirement is a concrete usage instruction. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use the tool, but the context is clear enough that an agent can identify the right invocation scenario.

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