appwrite_delete_message

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While 'Delete' implies a destructive operation, there is no information about deletion permanence (soft vs hard delete), what happens if the message_id does not exist (error types), or required authentication/authorization levels.

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 extremely brief (4 words excluding the prefix), but the '[UNIFIED]' tag at the beginning is structural noise that wastes valuable description space without adding value for tool selection. Every sentence should earn its place, and this prefix does not.

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?

Given zero annotation coverage, no output schema, and undocumented parameters, the description is severely incomplete for a destructive operation. It lacks critical context such as irreversibility warnings, error handling behavior, or return value structure.

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 schema has 0% description coverage for both 'site' and 'message_id' parameters. The description fails to compensate by providing no semantic context for these parameters—for example, whether 'site' refers to a site ID, domain, or project identifier, or what format the message_id expects.

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 states the action ('Delete') and resource ('message'), which is the minimum viable identification. However, the '[UNIFIED]' prefix is noise that reduces clarity, and it fails to distinguish what constitutes a 'message' in the Appwrite ecosystem compared to siblings like appwrite_delete_topic or appwrite_delete_subscriber, or clarify that this relates to the messaging service (SMS/push/email).

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?

No guidance provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like appwrite_get_message or appwrite_list_messages. No mention of prerequisites such as needing the message_id from a previous retrieval or permission requirements.

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