ghl_delete_social_post

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only indicates that the post is 'scheduled,' but does not mention consequences of deletion (irreversibility), permission requirements, what happens if the post doesn't exist, or whether only scheduled posts are eligible. This is minimal and leaves significant behavioral uncertainty for a destructive operation.

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 a single, direct sentence with no filler. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, and every word earns its place. For a simple tool, this is appropriately concise.

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?

Despite the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is insufficiently complete. It does not explain the parameter, provide usage context, or disclose any behavioral traits such as irreversibility or eligibility criteria. The 'scheduled' qualifier adds some context, but for a destructive tool, key information is missing, making the description barely adequate for an agent to use correctly without additional assumptions.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage; the parameter 'postId' is only defined as a required string. The description completely fails to explain what postId means, how to obtain it, or any format expectations. Since the schema does not provide semantics and the description adds nothing, the parameter meaning is entirely left to inference.

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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Delete a scheduled social media post.' It uses a specific verb ('delete') and resource ('social media post'), and the qualifier 'scheduled' distinguishes it from any other post-deletion tool. This is unambiguous and differentiates from sibling tools like ghl_create_social_post or ghl_get_social_posts.

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 implies usage (delete a scheduled post) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it provide exclusions (e.g., cannot delete published posts, or use ghl_cancel_scheduled_message for text messages). The context is clear from the name, but there is no explicit guidance about prerequisites or when not to use it.

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