drop-collection

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

Annotations already indicate destructive behavior (destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false). The description adds valuable context beyond annotations by noting that associated indexes are also removed and that views are included. This discloses side effects not captured by annotations, though it doesn't discuss permissions or reversibility, which is acceptable given the destructive hint.

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, front-loaded with the primary action, and each sentence adds value. It is concise without unnecessary elaboration, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 destructive operation with clear annotations and an output schema, the description sufficiently covers the operation and its side effects. It is complete for an agent to understand what will happen without needing additional details about return values or prerequisites.

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 description coverage is 100%, with both parameters ('database' and 'collection') adequately described as names. The description does not add further parameter semantics, but the schema handles it. Baseline of 3 applies because the schema does the heavy lifting.

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: 'Removes a collection or view from the database.' It specifies the resource (collection or view) and the effect (removal). It also mentions associated indexes, distinguishing it from sibling tools like drop-database or drop-index. The purpose is unambiguous and specific.

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 clear context on what the tool does, implying when to use it (when you need to remove a specific collection or view). It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the action is specific enough that the use case is evident, especially with sibling tool names available.

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