gemini_chat_delete

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does add the important context that deletion happens 'from local', implying no remote effect, but it does not disclose whether the action is reversible, whether associated history is also removed, or any destructive consequences. This is insufficient for a delete 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?

The description is a single concise sentence that directly states the action and scope. It is front-loaded and contains no irrelevant or redundant information, making it highly efficient.

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 one well-documented parameter and an output schema. However, despite the low complexity, the description lacks usage context and any warning about destructive consequences. The 'local' qualifier provides some scope, but overall it is only minimally complete.

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 describes the 'label' parameter as '削除する session の label' (the label of the session to delete), and the description echoes this with '指定 session'. With 100% schema coverage, the description adds little new meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 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?

The description clearly states the action ('delete') and the target resource ('specified session') with a scope ('from local'), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like gemini_chat_new, gemini_chat_list, and gemini_chat_history. The verb and resource are specific and unambiguous.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. It simply states what the tool does, so an agent has no context for when deletion is appropriate or how it interacts with other operations like continuing or listing sessions.

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