sw_delete_group

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

Despite the destructiveHint annotation, the description adds critical behavioral detail: it reveals that without confirm:true the tool makes NO network call and returns a dry-run preview. This is valuable context beyond the annotation, informing the agent that the destructive action is gated by a confirmation flag, thus preventing accidental deletions.

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 sentences long and front-loads the core action. It earns its place by explaining the confirm flag's behavior without unnecessary fluff, making it both concise and structured effectively.

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 only two simple parameters, no output schema, and a clear explanation of both execution modes, the description is fully complete for the tool's complexity. It provides all necessary context for an agent to invoke the tool correctly, including the safe dry-run behavior.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds extra nuance by explicitly stating that without confirm:true, no network call is made, which goes beyond the schema's 'returns a preview' statement. This supplementary information clarifies the safe execution path, earning a 4.

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 opens with 'Soft-delete a Splitwise group,' a specific verb+resource phrase that clearly states the tool's function. It distinguishes from sibling tools like sw_undelete_group by explicitly marking this as the soft-delete action, leaving no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 explains the two modes: without confirm:true it performs a dry-run preview with no network call, and with confirm:true it deletes. This provides clear guidance on how to invoke the tool safely, though it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternative tools beyond the implicit contrast with undelete.

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