bsky_delete_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions authentication requirements, which is useful, but fails to describe critical traits: whether the deletion is permanent, if it affects associated data (e.g., list members), what permissions are needed beyond authentication, or any rate limits. For a destructive operation with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior.

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 concise with a single sentence that is front-loaded with the core action. There is no wasted language, and it efficiently states the purpose and authentication requirement. However, it could be slightly more structured by separating the action from prerequisites for clarity.

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?

Given the tool's complexity as a destructive operation with no annotations, 0% schema coverage, and an output schema (which might help with return values), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral traits, parameter meanings, usage context, and fails to address the implications of deletion. For a tool that permanently removes data, this level of description is inadequate for safe and effective use.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for undocumented parameters. It adds no information about the two parameters (list_uri and acting_handle), such as what a list_uri is, how to obtain it, or the purpose of acting_handle. The description fails to provide any semantic context beyond what the bare schema offers, leaving parameters largely unexplained.

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 the verb ('削除します' - delete) and resource ('リスト' - list), making the basic purpose clear. However, it doesn't distinguish this from sibling tools like bsky_delete_post or bsky_remove_from_list, nor does it specify what type of list is being deleted (e.g., social list, feed list). The description is functional but lacks specificity about the resource scope.

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 provides minimal guidance with '要認証' (requires authentication), indicating a prerequisite but not when to use this tool versus alternatives. No context is given about when deletion is appropriate versus other list operations like bsky_remove_from_list or bsky_get_list, nor are there exclusions or comparisons to sibling tools.

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