delete_all_submissions

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

Annotations already set destructiveHint=true Footnote and idempotentHint=true, so the destructive nature is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context by explicitly stating that the form itself is not deleted, which clarifies the scope of the destructive operation beyond what annotations alone provide.

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 very short, front-loads the primary purpose, and contains only necessary information: the action, the scope boundary, the argument, and the return type. Every sentence earns its place.

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 one-parameter destructive tool, the description adequately covers the action, the unaffected resource (form), the required argument, and the return value. An output schema exists, so return details need not be expanded. Minor gaps such as irreversibility warnings are already implied by destructiveHint=true.

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?

There is one parameter, form_id, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description says 'Numeric form id,' but this largely repeats what the input schema already provides via type=integer and title='Form Id.' It identifies the parameter's purpose but adds little new semantic meaning.

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 action ('Delete every submission') on a specific resource ('a form'), which distinguishes it from the sibling 'delete_submission' (single submission) and 'delete_form' (the form itself). It also clarifies a key boundary: 'Does not delete the form itself.'

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 phrase 'every submission' makes the primary use case unambiguous. However, the description does not explicitly mention the alternative 'delete_submission' for deleting a single submission, so there is clear context but no explicit exclusions or routing to alternatives.

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