Delete emoji

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

The description discloses a critical behavioral trait: 'the first call changes nothing and returns a preview plus a confirm_token; repeating the call with the token deletes it.' This goes far beyond the annotations by explaining the non-destructive first call and the confirmation mechanism, directly enriching the agent's understanding of how to invoke the tool safely.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence adds value. It is concise and well-structured, providing necessary behavioral context without unnecessary detail.

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 destructive nature and the two-step workflow, the description covers the essential context for using it correctly. However, it omits details about the dry_run parameter, the exact contents of the preview, and permission requirements, leaving some gaps for an agent to infer.

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 description clarifies the confirm_token parameter ('repeating the call with the token deletes it') and implies the preview behavior, but it does not explain the dry_run parameter, which remains ambiguous. Since schema coverage is only 50%, the description partially compensates but leaves a significant gap for one of the four 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 states 'Delete a custom emoji' with a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from other delete tools. It also briefly explains the two-step confirmation process, which clarifies the tool's unique behavior.

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 clear usage context: the first call is a safe preview, and the second call with the token performs the deletion. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the resource is unique and the workflow is well-illustrated.

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