Delete Discussion

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

Annotations already set destructiveHint=true, and the description adds the valuable behavioral detail that the action is permanent, which is not fully captured by the annotation. It goes beyond the structured metadata by emphasizing irreversibility.

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 two short sentences that are front-loaded with the primary action and followed by a critical caveat. Every word earns its place; no filler or unnecessary detail.

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 delete operation with destructiveHint annotation and full parameter schema, the description provides the essential purpose and permanence caveat. There is no output schema to document, and no additional behavioral complexity requiring explanation.

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 full descriptions for both parameters (course_id and topic_id) with 100% coverage. The description itself adds no parameter-specific meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('discussion topic from a course'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_discussion, update_discussion, and get_discussion. The scope is precisely stated.

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?

Usage context is implied by the clear delete action, but there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives or any exclusions. For instance, it doesn't mention that this is only for discussion topics, not announcements. The permanence note indirectly warns of caution.

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