yougile_delete_message

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

The description discloses that the deletion is 'soft,' which is meaningful behavioral context beyond the destructiveHint=true annotation. It also explicitly notes that editing message text is not supported, providing useful API constraints. No contradictions with annotations.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and followed by a valuable constraint. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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 simple delete operation with two well-described parameters, a destructiveHint annotation, and no output schema, the description adequately covers the soft-delete behavior and a key API limitation. The simplicity of the tool means less additional context is required, though it stops short of fully complete guidance.

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 already provides 100% coverage with descriptions for both chatId and messageId. The tool description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 the action: 'Soft-delete a message.' The verb 'delete' and resource 'message' are specific and unambiguous. The added note about editing text not being supported distinguishes this from potential update operations, clarifying scope.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention alternatives like send_message or get_message, nor does it provide conditions for choosing this tool. The note about editing not being supported is a limitation, not a usage guideline.

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