outliner-collection_delete

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It correctly identifies this as a destructive operation by mentioning the force requirement, but it doesn't elaborate on other behaviors like whether the operation is reversible, whether child collections are recursively deleted, or if there are safety checks beyond the force flag.

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?

One concise sentence that conveys the core purpose and a key constraint. It's front-loaded with the action and includes the most important usage detail. No fluff, though it could be slightly longer to cover more behavioral context.

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?

This is a simple two-parameter delete tool with no output schema. The description covers the main purpose and the only key caveat (force requirement). However, given the destructive nature, it could add more context about irreversible changes or what happens to child elements, and it lacks any exclusions or conditions for use.

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 0%, so the description must explain the parameters. It only explains the 'force' parameter's purpose indirectly by stating it's required for non-empty collections, but it doesn't explain what 'collection' means or provide format details. The schema titles give some info ('Allow deleting a non-empty collection' and 'Collection to delete'), but the description adds minimal extra value beyond that.

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 action 'Delete a collection' with a specific resource (collection), and the force requirement adds important scope. It's distinguishable from sibling tools like outliner-collection_rename and outliner-object_unlink, though it doesn't explicitly name 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 context by explaining when force is required (when the collection contains objects or child collections), which guides the agent on when to use this tool and what parameters to set. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or mention alternatives like clearing the collection first or using outliner-orphans_purge.

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