delete_question_entry

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description adds value beyond them by warning that this changes stored DeepTutor learning data and by requiring explicit learner authorization. This is useful safety context and does not contradict the 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 concise and contains no filler. The warning is intentionally front-loaded for a destructive action, and the core purpose is stated clearly at the end. The structure is slightly unusual in placing the action last, but it remains efficient and readable.

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?

The tool is simple with two scalar parameters and an output schema, so return values do not need description coverage. The annotations cover the safety profile, and the description adds the key authorization precondition. It is complete enough for an agent to call this tool correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so entry_id and confirm are already fully documented in the schema. The description's 'Check the target ID and values' loosely maps to those parameters but does not add format, constraints, or semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Delete one Question Bank entry.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_question_entry, update_question_entry, and upsert_question_entry by the destructive action. The warning reinforces that this is a deletion, not a read or update.

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 an explicit precondition and when-not condition: 'call only when the learner explicitly requests this action.' It also tells the agent to check the target ID and values before proceeding. It does not name a specific alternative tool, but the guidance is clear enough for a destructive operation.

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