delete-item

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses destructive nature ('permanently delete'), permission requirements ('GM-only'), and matching strictness ('STRICT resolution'). However, it does not mention error handling or side effects if identifiers are not found.

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?

Three sentences, each purposeful. No redundancy. Front-loads action and resource, then adds constraints and alternatives.

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?

Covers core action, input format, and when to use alternative. Missing explicit mention of return value or success/failure behavior, but for a deletion tool this is acceptable.

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 describes parameter generically; description adds crucial context: 'exact ids (preferred) or exact names', and reinforces strict matching. This goes beyond the schema's own parameter description.

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 ('permanently delete'), the resource ('world-level Item documents from Items sidebar'), and the method ('by exact id or exact name'). It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'remove-from-actor' by specifying 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?

Explicitly states 'GM-only' for permission context, specifies when not to use it (for embedded actor items, use 'remove-from-actor'), and emphasizes strict matching to avoid accidental deletion. Provides clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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