delete_nodes

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, and the description reinforces it with 'Permanently delete.' It adds context beyond annotations: missing/non-removable nodes are skipped, and the return shape `{ ok, affected }` is disclosed. No contradictions.

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?

Two sentences, each earning its place: the action, the exception behavior, the alternative, and the return value. Front-loaded with the primary purpose, no redundancy or 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 destructive tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is complete: it states permanence, skips semantics, provides a reversible alternative, and specifies the return object. No critical information 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% because nodeIds has a clear description ('Node ids to delete'). The tool description adds that invalid/missing ids are skipped, which slightly enriches parameter semantics, but the core meaning is already fully documented by the schema.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Permanently delete nodes by id.' It clearly distinguishes from siblings like set_visible by noting the deletion is permanent and by offering a reversible alternative. The scope is unambiguous.

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 states when to use this tool vs. an alternative: 'To hide nodes reversibly instead of deleting them, use set_visible(false).' Also clarifies behavior for missing/non-removable nodes, so an agent knows how edge cases are handled.

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