Delete an empty prompt group

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

Annotations already declare destructive=true, idempotent=true and write semantics, so the safety bar is partly met. The description adds genuinely new behavior: paused prompts count toward emptiness, non-empty groups are refused rather than partially deleted, and the operation is irreversible. It does not discuss permissions or what the response contains, but that is minor given the annotation coverage.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with what the tool does, then the constraint, then the recovery procedure and the irreversibility warning. No filler or repetition of the schema.

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 one-parameter destructive tool with an output schema and full annotation coverage, the description supplies everything an agent needs: precondition, error semantics, remediation, and irreversibility. Return values are handled by the output schema.

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 coverage is 100% for the single groupId parameter, and the schema already says it is the id as list_prompt_groups reports it. The description only alludes to group ids indirectly through the update_prompt remediation, so baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Deletes one prompt group of the active project') and immediately narrows scope to empty groups, which cleanly distinguishes it from upsert_prompt_group and update_prompt. An agent can pick it without opening the schema.

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?

Gives an explicit precondition ('only when it has no prompts — paused prompts count too'), the failure mode ('a group that still has prompts is refused'), and the exact remediation path via update_prompt with groupId of another group or null. This covers when to use, when not to use, and the alternative tool by name.

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