delete-media

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It explicitly says 'permanently delete', indicating irreversibility and destructive intent. This provides valuable transparency, though it does not elaborate on other side effects or the force/trash bypass behavior (which is covered in the schema).

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, concise sentence with no filler words. It is front-loaded with the key action and resource, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 straightforward delete operation with two well-documented parameters, the description is sufficient. It clearly states the permanent nature, and the schema covers parameter details. No output schema exists, so return values are not expected. This is adequate for the tool's simplicity.

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 already provides full descriptions for both parameters (mediaId and force), achieving 100% schema description coverage. The tool description adds no parameter-specific meaning, so it does not need to compensate. A baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 permanently deletes media files from the WordPress library. It specifies the verb (delete), the resource (media files), and the scope (WordPress library), and the word 'permanently' helps distinguish it from any soft-delete/trash alternatives.

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 when permanent deletion of media is required, but it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or point to alternatives. The 'permanently' qualifier gives some context, but it lacks clear exclusionary guidance.

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