delete_assignment

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

Annotations already provide destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds that the action is permanent, which aligns with and slightly extends the destructive hint. No additional behavioral traits like rate limits, authentication needs, or side effects are disclosed.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two short sentences. The first sentence immediately states the action, and the second adds critical context about permanence. No redundant information is present.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema, good annotations), the description covers the core action and its permanence. It lacks details on potential side effects (e.g., cascading deletions) but is sufficient for a basic delete operation.

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 input schema already provides descriptions for both parameters (course_id and assignment_id) with 100% coverage. The description adds no further parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema offers, so it meets the baseline of 3.

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 the verb 'Delete' and the resource 'an assignment from a course,' making the purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes from siblings like delete_discussion or delete_file by specifying 'assignment.' The addition of 'permanent' reinforces the finality of the action.

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 implies usage when permanent deletion is needed but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_assignment or create_assignment. No when-not-to-use guidance or alternative references are provided.

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