delete_photo_albums

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, but the description goes further by disclosing exactly what survives (the photos stay in place) versus what is unrecoverable (selections, conditions, share links) and requiring user confirmation beforehand. That is precisely the missing behavioral context a destructive tool needs.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the destructive action and the survivability caveat, then confirmation, then alternatives. No sentence is filler and the ordering matches how an agent should reason about the call.

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 covering safety and no output schema, the description supplies everything else an agent needs: what is destroyed, what remains, irreversibility, confirmation requirement, and sibling routing. 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 coverage is 100% and the schema itself already explains the ID-or-name input and the ambiguous-name behavior, so the description carries no additional parameter burden. It says nothing about the 'albums' argument beyond what the schema documents, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

Specific verb + resource ('Delete Synology Photos albums') with the scope of what is deleted made explicit (album objects plus their share links, normal or smart). It also names the two nearest siblings it is not — photo_album action=remove and delete_photos — so an agent can separate it from them without reading schemas.

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?

Explicitly states when not to use it ('To only take items out of an album, use photo_album action=remove; to delete the photos themselves, delete_photos') and adds a procedural gate ('Confirm with the user first'). The routing conditions are fully specified.

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