Delete a Saved sub-dialog history

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true, but the description adds meaningful context by stating 'Irreversible' and clarifying the exact impact ('Wipe all messages... from a single origin peer'). This goes beyond the annotation by specifying the scope of destruction, though it does not mention auth requirements or other side effects.

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 two short sentences that front-load the primary action and resource, with the parenthetical adding necessary specificity and 'Irreversible' adding crucial risk info. Every word earns its place, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 has 5 parameters and no output schema, yet the description omits any guidance on the optional filtering parameters (maxId, maxDate, minDate) and accountId. It also does not describe what happens after deletion (e.g., return value). For a destructive tool with partial-deletion options, this is insufficient to ensure correct and safe invocation.

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 only 40% (peer and maxId have descriptions; maxDate, minDate, and accountId do not). The tool description provides no parameter explanations and even says 'Wipe all messages,' which conflicts with the existence of maxId/maxDate/minDate filters that allow partial deletion. This could mislead the agent into thinking the tool always deletes everything, without explaining how to limit the deletion.

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 ('Wipe') and clearly identifies the resource ('Saved-Messages sub-dialog') and scope ('forwards from a single origin peer'). It also distinguishes this from sibling tools like delete_messages and delete_user_history by targeting a sub-dialog of forwards, 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 implies when to use the tool (clearing a specific saved-messages sub-dialog) but does not explicitly compare it to alternatives such as delete_messages or delete_user_history, nor does it state when not to use it. There is no exclusion or prerequisite guidance, so usage context is clear but underdeveloped.

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