Delete workspace

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

Annotations confirm destructiveHint=true but do not say anything about irreversibility; the description adds that there is no undo and no export, specifies the full cascade of destroyed resources, and discloses a built-in refusal rule for the last workspace. That is rich behavioral context beyond the structured fields.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the destructive scope, then the irreversibility, then the precondition. No filler and every clause carries decision-relevant information.

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 single-parameter destructive tool with annotations covering the safety profile and no output schema, the description supplies the cascade, irreversibility, refusal behavior, and confirmation requirement. Nothing an agent needs before calling is missing.

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?

Only one parameter and schema description coverage is 100% — the schema already explains workspaceId comes from list_workspaces. The description adds no format, ID, or resolution detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (delete) with an emphasized scope modifier (PERMANENTLY) and enumerates exactly what else is destroyed: reels, uploads, scheduled posts, analytics, connected accounts. This distinguishes it clearly from sibling delete tools like delete_upload or delete_automation at a glance.

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?

Gives concrete preconditions and guardrails: confirm the exact workspace name first, and note that the last workspace cannot be deleted. It does not explicitly point to alternatives (e.g. use_workspace or rename_workspace) but the destructive scope plus the confirmation instruction gives clear when-to-use context.

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