Delete role (IRREVERSIBLE)

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description details the irreversible consequences: the role is removed from every member and every permission overwrite. It also requires confirm=true, which adds important behavioral context about an extra safety gate.

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 sentences long and front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence contributes critical information: the permanent deletion and the irreversibility/confirm requirement. There is no filler or redundancy.

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 tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential operational facts: what happens (permanent deletion), scope (members and permission overwrites), and required flag (confirm=true). It doesn't mention required permissions or the return value, but the given context is sufficient for correct invocation in most scenarios.

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 description adds meaning for the confirm parameter by requiring it to be true, which complements the schema's existing description. However, it provides no additional explanation for guild_id and role_id—only the schema's patterns exist, and the description doesn't state what these IDs reference. With only 33% schema description coverage, the description only partially compensates.

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 uses a specific verb+resource construction: 'Permanently delete a role from a guild.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_role and delete_channel while making the action and target explicit.

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 explicitly states that confirm=true is required as an explicit acknowledgement, providing a direct usage condition. It also implies the appropriate context by calling out irreversibility, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives or mention when not to use it.

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