ScheduleDeleteLesson

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the 'WARNING: Destructive' marker adds limited new information. However, the description does add meaningful context beyond annotations: it explicitly says the action removes the lesson and requires client-side approval. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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 and front-loaded: the action is stated first, then the critical destructive warning and approval requirement. Every sentence earns its place with no redundant fluff.

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 destructive delete operation with complete parameter schema and safety annotations, the description covers the essential context: what is deleted and that client approval is required. It does not explain return values or further side effects, but given the low complexity this is not a major gap.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and each parameter (lessonId, bodyComment, bodyDeleteRepeatLessons) is already explained in the schema. The description itself adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 a precise resource ('a lesson from the schedule'), making the tool's core function immediately clear. It distinguishes itself from other deletion tools by naming the schedule context, even though it does not explicitly compare to siblings.

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 guidance on when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as GroupClassesDelete, IndividualClassesDelete, or ScheduleCreateLesson. The destructive warning implies caution but does not state conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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