Delete post

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveness (destructiveHint: true) and non-read-only behavior. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations: deletion is permanent and limited to draft/failed posts. This is exactly the kind of state-dependent behavior an agent needs to know before invoking.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then the key precondition and usage trigger. Every phrase earns its place; there is 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 simple one-parameter delete operation with destructive and idempotent annotations, the description covers what, when, and under what conditions. No output schema exists, so omitting return details is acceptable. An agent has everything it needs to select and invoke this tool correctly.

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 input schema already documents postId with 100% coverage, so the description does not need to add much. The phrase 'by ID' reinforces the parameter's role but adds no new semantic detail beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate given full schema coverage.

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 uses a specific verb ('Delete'), names the resource ('a post'), and specifies the identifier ('by ID'). It also distinguishes the tool from post-related siblings by stating the deletion precondition (draft/failed only), making its purpose 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?

The description explicitly says when to use the tool: when the user wants to permanently remove a post. It also imposes a clear eligibility condition ('Only draft and failed posts can be deleted'), which helps agents avoid invalid calls. It does not explicitly name alternative tools for other states, but the guidance is sufficient for the common case.

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