Delete Message

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

Beyond the annotations (destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false), the description adds crucial behavioral details: deletion is irreversible, the parent ticket remains unaffected, and a successful call returns 200 OK with an empty body. This gives the agent a complete picture of side effects and expected response.

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 and front-loaded with the endpoint and action. It consists of two sentences that cover purpose, irreversibility, scope, and response behavior with no wasted words.

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 delete operation with two well-documented parameters and a clear annotation set, the description is complete. It covers the effect, scope (parent ticket preserved), and return value, leaving no significant gaps for an agent to misuse the tool.

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 schema already provides 100% descriptive coverage for both parameters (id and ticket_id) with clear explanations. The description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what is in the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Permanently delete a specific message from a ticket' with a clear verb and resource. It distinguishes from deleting the parent ticket by explicitly noting 'The parent ticket is not deleted', which differentiates it from sibling tools like gorgias_delete_ticket.

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 clear context about when to use this tool by specifying what it does (delete a message) and what it does not do (does not delete the parent ticket). However, it does not explicitly mention alternative tools or exclusion criteria, so it falls short of a 5.

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