delete_message

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. 'Delete a message' implies a destructive operation but does not mention irreversibility, required permissions, whether it affects all users, or any side effects. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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 unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and direct. However, it is so minimal that it borders on under-specification, but for the conciseness dimension, it is appropriately brief.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity, the description is not complete enough. There is no output schema, no annotations, and no mention of important context such as whether deletion is permanent, how it affects chat histories, or any preconditions. The description does not provide enough information for an agent to use the tool safely and effectively.

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 covers 100% of the parameters with clear descriptions for chatId and messageId. The description itself adds no parameter information, so it does not enhance the schema. The baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema already documents both parameters adequately.

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 'Delete a message' clearly states the action and resource, and the verb 'delete' distinguishes it from siblings like edit_message and send_message. However, it is essentially a paraphrase of the tool name with no additional context about scope or effects, making it only minimally adequate.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or cases where other tools (e.g., edit_message) might be more appropriate. The appropriate usage is implied only by the tool's name and the verb 'delete'.

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