external_squads_delete

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, so the bare word 'Delete' restates what structured data already provides. The description adds no context about irreversibility, whether members/assignments are orphaned on delete, or required permissions.

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?

A single short phrase that is trivially front-loaded and wastes no words. However, its brevity here reflects under-specification rather than efficient communication of needed detail.

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 one-parameter delete with a complete schema and annotations covering the safety profile, the minimum is met and no output schema needs explaining. It still omits any caveat about permanence or side effects, which a destructive operation would benefit from.

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% and the single uuid parameter is fully documented in the schema, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds no syntax, format, or semantic detail beyond it, making 3 the correct baseline.

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?

Clear specific verb+resource: 'Delete external squad'. The 'external' qualifier implicitly separates it from the sibling squads_delete, but the description never states that distinction explicitly, so the agent must infer it from the name alone.

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?

No when-to-use, prerequisites, or alternative guidance. With both squads_delete and external_squads_delete present, the description offers nothing to route the agent between them or to warn that deletion is intended for externally-managed squads.

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