Remove spam whitelist entry

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description still adds value the annotations cannot: an explicit instruction to confirm with the user and the ownership constraint on the domain argument.

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 short sentences with no waste: what it does, the constraint on inputs, and the safety instruction. The destructive warning is placed last, right before invocation, which is the most useful position.

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 full annotation coverage and no output schema, the description covers purpose, ownership precondition, and the confirmation requirement. It could optionally note whether removed entries can simply be re-added, but nothing essential 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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3 and the schema already documents both parameters with formats and examples. The description adds a semantic constraint not in the schema — that the domain must be owned by the caller while the whitelist entry itself is account-wide.

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 ('Removes an entry from the account-wide spam whitelist'), plus the scope of the affected list. An agent can immediately distinguish this from remove_spam_blacklist_entry and add_spam_whitelist_entry among the siblings.

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?

Gives a clear precondition (the domain must be one you own, while the list is account-wide) and a usage rule (confirm with the user before calling). It does not name the sibling alternatives explicitly, so it falls just short of the top band.

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