Delete saved search

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, openWorldHint=true and idempotentHint=false, so the danger profile is covered. The description adds one genuinely useful side effect — the linked email alert stops with the search — but says nothing about reversibility, error behavior for an unknown ID, or whether other users' data is affected. The second sentence largely restates the first rather than adding new behavior.

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?

It is short and front-loads the verb, but the two sentences are near-duplicates: 'and its email alert' versus 'its email alert stops with it.' The repetition occupies the space where a warning about irreversibility would have been more valuable.

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 single-parameter destructive delete with full schema coverage, rich annotations and no output schema, the description is close to sufficient. The remaining gap is the absence of any explicit irreversibility or failure-mode statement, which matters more here than for a read tool.

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 single parameter already documents itself as 'saved_search_id from list_saved_searches.' The description adds no format, sourcing, or constraint detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 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?

States a specific verb (Delete) and resource (one of this account's saved project searches), scoped to the signed-in account. It is clearly distinguishable from save_search and list_saved_searches by the destructive verb, though it does not name the sibling it complements.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, no mention that the ID should come from list_saved_searches (that hint lives only in the schema), and no prerequisite or confirmation guidance for a destructive action.

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