Delete a roll table

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the destructive nature is covered. The description adds the permission requirement, which is useful behavioral context. It does not describe side effects, return value, or error behavior, but the low bar set by the annotations makes this acceptable.

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 exactly two short sentences with no filler. The core operation is front-loaded, and the permission note is the only additional detail, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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 safety and idempotency, the description plus schema is nearly sufficient. The permission note adds important operational context. A minor gap is not clarifying that deletion is permanent, but the destructiveHint annotation already signals this.

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?

The schema description fully documents tableId as 'Id of the table to delete'. The description only re-states this as 'by its id', adding no additional semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate given 100% schema coverage.

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 states a specific verb ('Delete'), a specific resource ('roll table'), and the identifying mechanism ('by its id'). This clearly distinguishes the tool from related roll-table siblings like get-roll-table, update-roll-table, reset-roll-table, or draw-roll-table.

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 when to use the tool: when a roll table needs to be deleted. It also provides a meaningful prerequisite by requiring full roll table permission. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or give a when-not-to-use scenario, leaving usage guidance somewhat implicit.

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