delete_comment

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

The description indicates a destructive action (deletion) and adds the important behavioral constraint of 'own comments only'. However, with no annotations provided, it does not disclose other behaviors such as error responses, idempotency, or required permissions.

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 a single sentence that is front-loaded with the action and includes the key constraint. Every word serves a purpose with no 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?

While the tool is simple, the description lacks parameter details, error handling, and output information. Contextual signals show no output schema and low schema coverage, so the description should compensate but does not. It only partially addresses the tool's behavior.

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 does not mention any parameters. The input schema has 'dry_run' and 'comment_id' with no descriptions (0% schema coverage). The description fails to explain the purpose of 'dry_run' or how 'comment_id' is used, leaving the agent without semantic guidance.

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 the specific scope ('authored by the channel (own comments only)'). This distinguishes it from other comment-related tools like 'moderate_comment' which might handle others' comments.

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 when to use (own comments) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives. It mentions the ownership constraint but lacks guidance on scenarios like deleting others' comments (for which 'moderate_comment' might be used).

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