Delete messages

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

Annotations already mark this as destructive, but the description adds the crucial revoke behavior and its default value, plus the 'where possible' caveat. This goes beyond the structured metadata without contradicting it.

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-load the core purpose and then add the most important behavioral detail. No redundant words or repetition of schema information.

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?

The tool is relatively simple and annotations cover the destructive nature. Still, the description omits the meaning of peer and accountId, which are essential for executing the call correctly. The return value and error cases are not described, but no output schema exists, so some burden remains on the description.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must explain all parameters. It explicitly clarifies revoke and indirectly messageIds, but leaves peer and accountId completely undescribed. This partial coverage is insufficient for a 4-parameter tool with no schema descriptions.

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 the specific verb 'delete' with resource 'messages by id', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like edit_message or delete_story. The id qualifier adds precision about how messages are targeted.

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 phrase 'by id' implies the tool is for deleting specific messages already acquired via list/search/get operations, providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like delete_saved_history, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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