Delete sticker

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

The description adds crucial behavioral details beyond the destructiveHint annotation: the tool is not immediately destructive; the first call is safe and returns a preview. This prevents accidental deletions and informs the agent about the confirmation mechanism.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, no wasted words. It efficiently conveys purpose, usage pattern, and safety behavior.

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 has 4 parameters and no output schema, the description explains the expected return (preview + confirm_token) and the two-step flow. It does not detail error handling or the preview content, but covers the essential interaction pattern.

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 schema covers 50% of parameters with descriptions (sticker, guild). The description adds meaning to the undocumented dry_run and confirm_token parameters by explaining the two-step process, implying their roles. This provides useful context but does not explicitly map them to the schema.

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 'Delete a custom sticker', providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_sticker and update_sticker by focusing on deletion.

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 explicitly outlines a two-step process: first call returns a preview and confirm_token (safe, no change), second call with token performs the deletion. This gives clear when-to-use guidance and explains the safe invocation pattern.

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