Delete Forms survey

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, but the description adds real value: it specifies exactly what is destroyed (questions and collected answers), that it is irreversible, and the API's 204 No Content response. The closing phrase 'the returned record confirms the accepted action' is slightly muddled against the stated 204 response, keeping this short of a 5.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the destructive warning so the risk is visible immediately. The second sentence is compact but its 'returned record' phrasing is somewhat confusing next to the 204 No Content claim, costing a point.

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 one-parameter destructive tool with rich annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential risk and response behavior. The only minor gap is the ambiguous response sentence, which could mislead about what is actually returned.

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%, so the single survey_id parameter (24-char hex, sourced from surveys_list) is already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning about the parameter, which is the correct baseline-3 outcome when the schema does the work.

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 a specific verb (delete) and resource (a form/survey) and clarifies the scope as permanent removal of the survey along with its questions and answers. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like forms_surveys_update, forms_surveys_unpublish, and forms_questions_delete.

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 word 'permanently' and 'IRREVERSIBLE' implies this is the hard-delete option, and the schema points to surveys_list for obtaining the id, giving implicit guidance. However, no explicit alternatives (e.g., unpublish) or when-not-to-use conditions are stated, so usage is only implied.

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