Delete DataLens embed

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds real value beyond them: it discloses the side effect on generated links and specifies that a second delete fails with 404 rather than silently succeeding. It does not cover permissions or whether removal is permanent.

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 brief clauses, zero filler, with the core action and its effect front-loaded and the error behavior trailing. Every sentence earns its place.

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 single-parameter delete tool with a full annotation set and no output schema, the description supplies the two things an agent most needs: the consequence of deletion and the repeat-call behavior. Only authorization/permanence details are absent.

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 description coverage is 100% and the single embed_id parameter is already documented in the schema as coming from embeds_list, so the description correctly does not duplicate it. Baseline 3 applies since the schema carries the full parameter burden.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Delete an embed") plus the immediate consequence ("its links stop working"), which unambiguously separates it from the embeds_list/create/update siblings. It stops short of naming a sibling or its scope, so it is clear but not maximally differentiated.

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 destructive intent makes the usage context obvious, and the note that a repeat call returns 404 helps an agent avoid retry loops. However, there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or permission prerequisite stated.

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