Delete post

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

Annotations already mark the tool as destructive and non-read-only; the description adds meaningful behavioral context by stating the operation is irreversible, restricted to authored posts, and only allowed after explicit user confirmation. This goes beyond the structured hints.

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?

Three short sentences, each carrying distinct information: endpoint, ownership restriction, confirmation requirement, and destructiveness. No filler.

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 simple destructive action with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers what is needed to invoke it safely: what it deletes, who may delete, what must be confirmed, and that it is irreversible. The destructive annotation is reinforced rather than contradicted.

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 description clarifies post_id as the ID of a post the user authored via the endpoint and ownership note, and it reinforces the confirm parameter's purpose by tying it to the user naming the exact post. Schema already documents confirm well, but post_id benefits from the description.

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?

Description states a specific verb ('delete'), a resource ('posts'), and a scope restriction ('only delete posts you authored'), and identifies the endpoint. This distinguishes it clearly from sibling tools that create, reply, quote, or repost rather than delete.

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?

It gives a clear condition for use: deleting a post authored by the user, with explicit confirmation required after the user names the exact post. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool beyond the ownership restriction, leaving some inference to the agent.

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