Delete a media item

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description goes further by explaining that deletion is permanent, bypasses the trash, requires confirm, and leaves broken images for referencing content – valuable context beyond the annotation.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and every clause adds significant meaning. No waste.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description covers key behavioral consequences (permanent deletion, broken references) and the confirm requirement. It doesn't address errors or permissions, but given the tool's simplicity and annotation coverage, it is adequately complete.

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 100%, and the description echoes the confirm requirement without adding new meaning for id or site_id. The description adds little beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 'Delete a media item' with a specific verb and resource, and adds crucial detail about attachments bypassing the trash and permanent deletion, distinguishing it from generic delete tools like delete_content or delete_comment.

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 the tool is for media items but does not explicitly contrast with sibling delete tools or state when to use it instead of them. It provides behavioral context (permanent deletion, confirm requirement) but no direct guidance on selection among alternatives.

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