Delete content

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, so the description adds value by explaining the trash-first behavior and the permanent deletion path (force:true AND confirm:true) plus the irreversible consequence (row and meta removed). It does not cover other potential side effects like revisions or hook triggers, but the core behavioral traits are well disclosed.

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, front-loaded with the primary action ('Delete content of any type') and then detailing the trash vs. permanent distinction. No filler, every clause adds information. Excellent structure.

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?

With no output schema, the description covers the essential behavioral side (trash, permanent deletion, irreversibility). It does not mention return values or error conditions, but for a destructive tool that is often acceptable. The parameters are fully documented in the schema, so the description is nearly sufficient for an agent to call it correctly.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by explicitly stating the combination of force and confirm is required for permanent deletion and that this removes the row and meta. This clarifies the irreversibility, which is not directly in the schema descriptions, enhancing the parameter semantics.

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 a specific verb ('Delete') and a clear resource ('content of any type'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_term, delete_media, and delete_user. The mention of trash and permanent deletion adds specificity about the behavior, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 this is a generic content deletion tool ('any type') but does not explicitly contrast it with specialized delete tools (e.g., delete_media, delete_term). It does not say 'use this for posts and pages; use delete_media for media', so an agent has to infer when to choose this over siblings. There is no when-not guidance.

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