delete_collective_page

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds critical context: the operation is permanent and requires the page to be in trash. This goes beyond the annotations by clarifying the precondition and the finality. It doesn't discuss error behavior or permissions, but for a delete-from-trash operation the added context is valuable.

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 concise and well-structured: a clear purpose statement, a prerequisite and warning, then an Args section with each parameter explained, and a Returns line. It front-loads the key information and contains no fluff. 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 simple two-parameter delete operation with an output schema (confirmation message), the description covers all essential aspects: what it does, the prerequisite, the irreversible nature, parameter definitions, and the return type. It does not need to explain error cases or side effects beyond irreversibility, as the tool is straightforward and the sibling context is clear.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It provides a one-line explanation for each parameter: 'collective_id: The numeric collective ID' and 'page_id: The numeric page ID.' This adds minimal meaning beyond the integer type, clarifying the roles but not offering constraints or additional context. It is adequate but not rich.

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 clearly states the action: permanently delete a page from the collective's trash. It specifies the resource (page) and the location (trash) and distinguishes it from sibling tools like trash_collective_page (which moves to trash) and restore_collective_page (which restores). The verb 'delete' is specific and the scope is unambiguous.

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 explicitly states the prerequisite: the page must be in the trash first, and names the exact tool to use (trash_collective_page). It also warns that the action is irreversible, guiding the agent to avoid this tool if the page might be needed again. It does not explicitly mention restore_collective_page as an alternative for non-permanent removal, but the irreversibility warning is clear enough.

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