delete_page

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and 'soft-delete' is a genuinely useful disclosure: the record is marked rather than destroyed, implying recoverability. However it omits permissions, whether child components/redirects are affected, and whether a restore path exists, so it covers only one behavioral trait of a mutation operation.

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?

A single four-word sentence with the verb, the critical 'soft' qualifier, and the identifying parameter front-loaded. Zero filler; nothing could be trimmed without losing information.

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 destructive-adjacent operation with no annotations and no output schema, an agent still lacks side-effect information (cascade to components/redirects), confirmation behavior, and recovery options. The schema is simple and fully documented, so this is adequate but has clear gaps.

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?

Only one parameter and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already fully documents 'id' (numeric, exclusiveMinimum 0). The phrase 'by id' adds no meaning beyond that, making the baseline 3 correct.

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?

Specific verb+resource ('soft-delete a page by id') that cleanly separates it from the sibling mutation tools (update_page, create_page) and from delete_component. It is clear what the tool acts on, though it does not name any sibling or scope contrast explicitly.

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?

No when-to-use, when-not-to-use, prerequisites, or alternative tools are given. The 'soft' qualifier hints at behavior but gives no guidance on when this is preferred over update_page or how it relates to list_pages/get_page.

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