delete_announcement

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

Beyond the annotations (destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false), the description discloses what specifically gets destroyed ('all associated comments and notifications'), that the action is irreversible, and that admin privileges are required. These are meaningful behavioral facts the annotations do not convey. 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 front-loaded with the core action, followed by prerequisites, consequences, then a clean Args/Returns docstring structure. Every sentence earns its place; there is no filler or repetition of schema content.

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 with annotations and an output schema, this description covers everything an agent needs: the action, the admin prerequisite, the exact scope of destruction, irreversibility, how to find the input, and the return value. Nothing material is missing.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the single parameter, and it does thoroughly: it specifies the announcement_id as numeric and instructs how to source valid values via list_announcements. This adds real guidance beyond the bare integer type in the schema.

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 opening sentence 'Delete an announcement from Nextcloud' uses a specific verb and resource, and the scope is unambiguous. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like delete_form, delete_comment, and delete_question, which operate on different entities. The title is null, so the description carries the full burden and succeeds.

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 states a clear prerequisite ('Requires admin privileges') and gives a concrete usage pointer ('Use list_announcements to find IDs'). This provides clear context for when the tool is callable and how to obtain a valid input. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use conditions, so it stops short of a 5.

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