seo_delete_cluster

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses the destructive cascading behavior: deletes every SeoRoadmap item and its brief, clears cluster links on blog articles and keywords, and is NOT UNDOABLE with no soft-delete. It also notes the operation is irreversible, which is critical behavioral context. No contradictions with annotations exist.

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 compact yet information-dense, with no filler words. Every sentence adds necessary detail: the action, cascade consequences, non-deletion of related items, irreversibility, housekeeping context, confirm requirement, and alternative tool. Front-loading the core action and consequences makes it easy to scan.

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?

This is a destructive, high-complexity tool with no annotations and no output schema. The description fully covers the operational context: what gets deleted, what doesn't, how to confirm, reversibility, and the preferred alternative. It is complete enough for an agent to safely decide whether and how to invoke it.

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?

Although schema coverage is 100%, the description enhances parameter understanding by explaining that confirm: true is required to proceed and that clusterId should come from seo_list_clusters. It also describes what happens to related entities, providing meaning beyond raw schema field descriptions.

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 opens with 'Hard-delete a cluster,' clearly stating the action and target resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling seo_reject_cluster by explaining the difference in destructiveness and reversibility, making the purpose highly 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?

Explicit guidance is provided: it states this is a 'housekeeping op — not part of the main flow', requires confirm: true to proceed, and explicitly recommends seo_reject_cluster as the reversible alternative when the goal is just to remove from the active pipeline. This clearly covers when to use and when not to use.

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