Delete a widget

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

The description reveals a nuanced behavioral trait: default soft-delete that preserves settings, and a force option for permanent deletion. This goes beyond the destructiveHint=true annotation by explaining the reversible default, adding valuable context without contradicting 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?

A single, well-structured sentence that is front-loaded with the primary action and then explains the optional branch. No wasted words; every phrase earns its place.

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 straightforward delete operation with three parameters fully documented in the schema, the description covers the key behavioral distinction (soft vs. hard delete) and the rationale for the default. No output schema exists, so lack of return-value info is acceptable. It doesn't cover error cases or permissions, but those are not essential for calling the tool.

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 a baseline of 3 applies. The description adds useful context by explaining that the default (without force) moves the widget to inactive area so settings survive, which elaborates on the parameter behavior beyond the schema's 'Delete permanently instead of moving to inactive widgets.'

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 ('Remove') and resource ('a widget'), and clarifies the two deletion modes (soft/hard) which distinguishes it from other delete tools (e.g., delete_content, delete_media). This is clear and non-tautological.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. The description doesn't mention alternatives or contexts where another tool would be preferred. While the title implies it's for widgets, it doesn't help the agent decide between this and similar delete tools beyond the resource type.

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