delete

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds nothing beyond that — it does not say whether deletion is permanent, whether it affects only the in-memory session or saved files, or what happens to dependent selections.

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?

A single short sentence with no filler, and the core action is front-loaded. It is efficient, though its brevity stems partly from under-specification rather than tight editing.

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?

With one fully documented parameter, an output schema, and annotations covering destructiveness and idempotency, the definition is minimally sufficient to call the tool. It nonetheless omits the scope of destruction and the distinction from 'remove', which matter for a destructive operation in a crowded sibling set.

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 coverage is 100% and the 'name' parameter is documented in the schema with wildcard support and the special 'all' value. The description contributes no additional meaning about argument format or accepted syntax, so the baseline 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 states a verb (deletes) and the resource classes (objects or selections), which is more informative than the bare name 'delete'. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling 'remove', which in this toolset is the obvious confusable alternative, leaving the agent to guess which one applies.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of alternatives such as 'remove' or 'deselect'. The agent must infer entirely from the name and schema when this tool is appropriate.

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