WooCommerce: Delete product

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one genuinely useful nuance beyond that: the operation may be reversible ('move to trash for later restoration'), meaning destructiveHint does not always mean irreversible. It stops short of stating which mode is the default, what permissions are needed, or what is returned.

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 front-loaded sentences with no filler; the reversible-vs-permanent distinction appears immediately. The '[UNIFIED]' prefix is noise but does not impede comprehension.

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 destructive mutation tool with no output schema and zero schema coverage, the definition is minimally viable: safety is carried by annotations and reversibility is noted. Missing are the force-parameter mapping, whether a trashed product can be re-fetched or restored via another tool, and any confirmation/permission requirement.

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 0% across three parameters, so the description must carry the load and does not. It never names the `force` parameter, whose default of false is the actual switch between trash and permanent deletion, and `site` and `product_id` get no mention at all. The trash/permanent distinction is conveyed conceptually but not mapped to any input.

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 and resource ('Delete or trash a WooCommerce product') and clarifies the two outcomes. The resource scope (product vs. product_variation, product_category, product_attribute siblings) is unambiguous from the name and description, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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 two usage modes (permanent delete vs. trash for restoration) but never says which parameter selects which, nor when an agent should prefer one over the other. No prerequisites, no mention of related siblings such as the variation delete or the get_product check-before-delete flow.

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