Menus: delete

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds genuinely non-derivable behavior: the delete cascades to every item including locked built-in items, it is irreversible, and it leaves the role with no dashboard menu if this was its only one. Those side effects are exactly the context an agent needs before invoking a destructive cascade.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and cascade scope, then the alternative, then the caution. Every sentence carries information an agent needs; nothing is padding.

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?

A single-parameter destructive tool with full schema coverage, no output schema, and complete annotation coverage. The description supplies the cascade scope, irreversibility, and role side effect, so nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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% and the single menu_id parameter is fully documented in the schema, including how to find it via menus_list. The description adds no parameter-level syntax or format detail beyond that, 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete a menu and all of its items') and immediately distinguishes itself from the sibling menus_remove_item, which is named explicitly. An agent can tell this apart from menus_update, menus_reorder, and menus_remove_item without inspecting either schema.

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?

Explicitly routes the single-item case to `menus_remove_item` and tells the agent to confirm with the user before running. Both the when-to-use and the when-to-use-something-else conditions are stated rather than implied.

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