delete_layout

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, so the destructive nature is known. The description adds valuable behavioral context by disclosing the cascading effect on templates that referenced the layout, which is not inferable from the schema or annotations. It does not discuss reversibility or failure behavior, but the core side effect is communicated.

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 with no filler. The main action is front-loaded, and the important side effect is stated immediately in the second sentence.

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 delete operation, the description covers the action and the key downstream effect. There is no output schema, but a return-value explanation is less critical for a destructive tool. Minor gaps such as error behavior or nonexistent permalink handling are not addressed.

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 fully documents the only parameter (permalink) with the description 'Layout permalink', so schema coverage is 100%. The tool description adds no additional meaning about permalink format or constraints, landing at the baseline.

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 and resource ('Delete a layout') and adds a distinct consequence ('Templates that referenced it fall back to no wrapper'). This clearly differentiates deletion from sibling tools like update_layout or archive_stream.

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 gives no explicit guidance about when to choose delete_layout over alternatives such as update_layout or create_layout. There is no when/when-not context, so an agent must infer usage solely from the tool name.

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