delete_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, and it delivers: the deletion is a soft delete restorable from the app trash, and on a shared list it removes the list for every collaborator. It also discloses the required confirmation UX, which is behavioral context an agent cannot get from any structured field.

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, all load-bearing: impact and reversibility first, then shared-list scope, then the confirmation requirement and the alternative tool. No repetition of the tool name or filler.

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 two-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, everything an agent needs is present: reversibility, cross-user impact, the pre-call confirmation rule, and the sibling that handles the adjacent case.

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%, including the non-obvious note that listName is only for the permission prompt and is not sent to the API. The description reinforces 'naming the list' but adds no syntax or format 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 and resource ('Move a whole shopping list to the Listonic trash') and immediately scopes it against the sibling delete_items, which deletes items instead of the list. An agent can distinguish this from delete_items and rename_list without opening any schema.

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?

Explicitly names the alternative ('To delete items but keep the list, use delete_items instead') and the condition that selects it. It also states a hard prerequisite ('Always confirm with the user, naming the list, before calling') and points to get_lists for the shared-status check that determines blast radius.

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