delete_comment

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true. The description adds valuable behavioral details: cascade-deletes all descendants and specifics about tracking (w:del, non-revision change manifest). This goes beyond the annotations, disclosing side effects and recording behavior.

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?

Two sentences, each serving a purpose. The first sentence is a clear action, the second adds technical behavioral context. Front-loaded but the second sentence may be dense; still efficient with no wasted words.

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 delete tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core action and side effects. However, it lacks information on error conditions, prerequisites (e.g., file must be open), or what the response looks like, leaving some gaps.

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 100% with descriptions for both parameters. The tool description does not add extra meaning or syntax details beyond the schema, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 a comment and all its threaded replies') and identifies the resource (comment). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like add_comment or get_comments by specifying deletion of threaded replies.

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 implies use for deleting comments but does not explicitly state when to use or avoid this tool, nor does it mention alternatives (e.g., delete_footnote). Some context is given but lacks explicit guidance.

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