delete_landing_page

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that deletion is permanent and irreversible, which is critical. However, it does not mention potential cascading effects on versions, assets, or permissions, leaving some ambiguity.

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-loaded with the core purpose. The second sentence gives the necessary confirmation step and a warning. There is no unnecessary verbiage.

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 destructive operation with two well-described parameters and no output schema, the description is largely sufficient. It covers the action, the required confirmation, and the irreversibility. It could mention side effects, but that is not critical for this low-complexity 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 covers both parameters (slug and confirm) with 100% description coverage. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, only clarifying that confirm is needed to proceed, which is already encoded by const: true.

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 clearly states a specific action ('Permanently delete') and a specific resource ('a landing page'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_lp_version (which deletes a version, not the whole page) and delete_side_page.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like delete_lp_version or unpublishing. The only instruction is to pass confirm: true, which is a procedural requirement rather than a usage context.

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