delete_kb_doc

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description's only extra fact is the VG-agent scope restriction; it says nothing about irreversibility, what happens to embeddings/indexes, or whether deletion cascades.

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 compact sentence with the action front-loaded and the scope qualifier trailing. No filler, though it is sparse enough to be almost telegraphic.

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 destructive, non-idempotent operation with no output schema, the agent is left unsure about reversibility and side effects on the agent's knowledge base. Annotations cover the risk flag, but the description could have stated permanence and any prerequisites (e.g., doc must belong to the agent).

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% with only two clearly named parameters, so the schema carries parameter meaning fully. The description adds no insight into agentId/docId relationships or formats, which is acceptable at this coverage level.

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?

Specific verb 'Delete' plus resource 'knowledge base document', with the scope qualifier '(VG agents only)'. It is clearly distinguishable from bulk_delete_kb_docs and delete_agent, though it does not name those siblings explicitly.

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 parenthetical '(VG agents only)' gives an eligibility condition for use, but there is no guidance on when to prefer this over bulk_delete_kb_docs or how to locate a docId (e.g., via list_kb_docs/search_kb_docs). Usage is implied rather than stated.

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