Leave (Delete) Private Conversation

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

Annotations already mark the operation as destructive and non-read-only. The description adds useful behavioral context by specifying the exact consequence: the conversation is removed from the inbox and permanently deleted once no participants remain. This goes beyond the structured hints without contradicting them.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the action and consequence, with a useful parenthetical and implementation note. 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 simple two-parameter destructive action, the description plus schema and annotations provide enough to call it correctly. It covers the core consequence and deletion condition, though it does not mention return values or failure behavior, which is a minor gap given there is no output schema.

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 coverage is only 50%: dry_run is described, but conversation_id is not. The tool description does not explicitly explain conversation_id, though its name and the phrase 'private conversation' make its purpose reasonably inferable. The description adds minimal parameter-level value beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb ('Leave') and resource ('private conversation'), and goes beyond the title by explaining the effect: removal from the inbox and deletion once no participants remain. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like pm_send, pm_read, and pm_reply.

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 makes the intended use obvious by naming the action and its effect, but it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives or mention exclusions. The context is clear, but no direct routing guidance is provided.

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