delete_comment

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds substantial context beyond them: irreversibility, the preview-then-confirm protocol, and hard limits (own media only, live-video comments unsupported). This is exactly the extra behavioral detail annotations cannot convey.

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?

Front-loaded with the destructive action and the safety protocol before the Args block. The Args section partially restates the schema, but each line adds semantics, so waste is minimal rather than zero.

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?

Covers the mutation's safety profile, the required workflow, parameter meaning, scope limits, and a brief return summary (executed/summary/success) even though an output schema exists. Nothing an agent needs to call it safely 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the burden, and it does: comment_id is explained as coming from get_media_comments, and confirm is defined as false=preview (default) vs true=permanent delete. Both parameters gain meaning not present in the bare schema.

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 ('Permanently delete a comment on the user's media') and immediately distinguishes it from the reversible sibling hide_comment. An agent can tell exactly what this does and how it differs from alternatives.

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 says when to use it ('only when the user clearly wants the comment gone'), names the alternative (hide_comment) and the condition selecting it, and prescribes the two-step confirm=false then confirm=true workflow with the approval gate.

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