Delete an Untappd check-in

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

Description discloses destructive irreversible behavior ('Permanently delete...This is destructive and cannot be undone') and the confirm parameter's role as a safeguard. Annotations already indicate non-readOnly and idempotent, and description adds crucial context about the dry-run feature, which annotations do not cover. No contradiction with annotations.

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 sentences that are direct and front-loaded. Every word is needed: the action, the destructiveness, the confirm parameter's dual behavior. No 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?

Tool has no output schema, so description must cover key behavior. It explains the delete action, the dry-run mechanism, and the irreversible nature. It doesn't specify the return value (e.g., success message or deleted object), but for a delete tool, that is less critical. The ownership of the check-in is implied by 'YOUR'.

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%, providing a baseline of 3. The description adds value by explaining the 'confirm' parameter's effect (dry-run vs actual delete) beyond the schema's simple 'boolean' description. For 'checkin_id', the description is minimal ('Untappd check-in id'), but the schema already covers it.

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?

Description clearly states the action: 'Permanently delete one of YOUR check-ins by its id.' The verb (delete), resource (check-in), and ownership (YOUR) are explicit, distinguishing it from sibling tools like untappd_delete_comment.

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?

Description explains the dry-run preview behavior (without confirm:true) and the actual deletion (with confirm:true), guiding the agent on safe usage. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use (e.g., not for others' check-ins), but the 'YOUR' qualifier implies that restriction.

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