Delete a chat message

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

Annotations already supply destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint, and the description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond them: it narrows deletion to messages written by the Gamemaster and flags a permission prerequisite that causes refusal. This helps an agent predict refusal behavior without contradicting the annotations.

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?

Two sentences deliver the action, scope, key parameter, and a permission gate with no filler. The most important purpose information is front-loaded, and the permission note earns its place by explaining a likely refusal scenario.

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 single-required-parameter delete operation with destructive annotations, the description is largely complete: what to delete, by what identifier, under what permission condition. There is no output schema, and it does not mention the response shape or not-found behavior, but those are minor for a simple delete operation.

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%: messageId is already documented as 'Id of the message.' The description only reiterates the id requirement via 'by id,' adding no meaningful semantics beyond the schema. This matches the baseline for fully covered parameters.

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 names a specific action ('Delete a chat message'), identifies the exact resource ('written by the Gamemaster the bridge runs as'), and explicitly requires an id. This cleanly separates it from siblings like update-chat-message, send-chat-message, and list-chat-messages.

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 deletion context is clear: the tool is used to delete a specific chat message by id. It also gives a usage-relevant condition by stating that the tool is 'Refused until the permission settings have a level for chat messages that allows deleting.' It does not explicitly name alternatives or when not to use it, but the purpose is unambiguous given siblings.

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