Delete library

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description elaborates on the irreversible nature ('Permanently delete', 'irreversible') and the cascading effect ('every template inside it'). It also discloses the limitation of no per-template delete, adding valuable behavioral context beyond the 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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the action and consequences, and every clause contributes critical information. It is concise but complete, with no fluff or repetition.

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 tool's simplicity, a single required parameter, rich annotations, and no output schema, the description covers the essential context: the destructive scope, irreversibility, and a warning to preserve important items. It is fully sufficient for an agent to use correctly.

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 50%: athlete is documented in the schema, but library_id is not. The description does not address parameters directly, but the required library_id is self-evident from the tool name and phrase 'delete a library'. The optional athlete is already explained in the schema, so the description adds little parameter semantics.

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 function: 'Permanently delete a library AND every template inside it'. It specifies the resource (library) and the action (delete), and distinguishes from siblings by noting there is no per-template delete, making the scope 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 provides a clear prerequisite: 'Schedule anything you want to keep first' and explicitly warns about the lack of per-template delete, which frames when to use this tool. It does not explicitly name alternative tools, but the context makes it clear this is the only way to delete a library and its contents.

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