Delete a draft theme

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, so the description adds value by specifying that the live site is unaffected and that files are removed. This goes beyond the annotation by clarifying the scope of destruction (only the sandbox copy). No contradiction; the description aligns with annotations.

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 concise sentences with no wasted words. The main action is front-loaded, and the clarifying detail about the live site immediately follows, making it efficient and easy for an agent to parse.

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?

The description effectively conveys the essential context: destructive operation on draft themes only, with no impact on the live site. The confirmation requirement is covered in the schema, so the description doesn't need to repeat it. The tool is simple, and the description, combined with schema and annotations, is complete enough.

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 descriptions for all 3 parameters are detailed and self-explanatory, providing 100% coverage. The description adds no additional parameter information, but that's acceptable given the schema's thoroughness. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 identifies the verb 'Discard' and the resource 'draft theme' with its files. It also differentiates from siblings like publish_draft_theme or delete_theme by explicitly stating the live site is unaffected, making the scope 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 gives clear context: this tool is for discarding draft themes without affecting the live site. While it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools like delete_theme, the clarification that live site is unaffected effectively tells the agent this is for sandbox copies only. This is a clear contextual cue, though not an explicit exclusion.

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