MarathonDeleteModerator

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

The annotations already mark the operation as destructive, and the description reinforces it with a WARNING and the statement that it removes the moderator. It also adds the client-side approval requirement, which is operational information the agent would not know from the schema alone.

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 short, front-loaded with the core action, and places the destructive warning prominently. There is minor redundancy between 'Delete' and 'removes the moderator', but overall it is appropriately sized.

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?

The critical operational facts—destructiveness, non-read-only behavior, and client approval—are covered by the description and annotations. However, the relationship among the four parameters is not explained, and with no output schema there is no statement about what the caller should expect back.

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?

All four parameters have schema descriptions and schema coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to repeat them. It does not add extra meaning about how bodyIsSelectAll or bodySelectedPupilsIds relate to the deletion, but the schema already provides basic naming information.

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 states a specific verb and resource: delete a marathon moderator. It is unambiguous, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling moderator-management tools like MarathonCreateModerator or MarathonUnsetModeratorsForPupil.

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 phrasing implies the tool is used when a marathon moderator should be removed, and the client-side approval requirement is a useful prerequisite. However, there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to similar marathon moderator tools.

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