Roles: delete

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered by structured data. The description adds nothing beyond that — no note that deletion is permanent, whether it cascades to role permissions, or whether an error occurs if the role is in use.

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 six-word sentence that front-loads the action and resource with zero filler. Nothing is redundant or padded.

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 one-parameter destructive tool whose annotations cover the safety profile, the essentials are present, but with no output schema the agent has no idea whether anything is returned (e.g. the deleted record or a confirmation). Mentioning irreversibility and expected result would round it out.

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?

There is a single required parameter with 100% schema description coverage ("Role ID to delete"), so the schema already carries the semantics. The description merely echoes "by ID" and adds no format or sourcing guidance, making the baseline 3 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 gives a clear verb and resource ("Delete a role") plus the selector ("by ID"), so an agent knows exactly what the tool does. It does not differentiate from siblings such as roles_create or roles_permissions_remove, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus alternatives (roles_list to find the ID first, roles_permissions_remove to strip permissions) and no preconditions or warnings about the destructive nature. Usage must be inferred entirely from the name.

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