Delete group rule

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

Beyond the destructiveHint=true annotation, the description discloses the key side effect that later rules renumber upward and that the full new list is returned, plus the admin permission requirement. For a destructive mutation with no output schema, that is meaningful added context.

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?

Short and front-loaded with the action and the admin restriction. The only waste is the duplicated 'Admins only' at the end, which adds no new information.

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?

Covers permission, side effects, and return shape, which is most of what an agent needs for a destructive two-parameter tool. It doesn't mention irreversibility or error behavior for an out-of-range number, but annotations already signal destruction.

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%, so both parameters are already documented, including that the number comes from list_group_rules. The description's note that later rules shift up implicitly warns that stored numbers change, which is a modest value-add but not a substitute for anything missing.

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 and resource ('Delete a group rule') and adds scope ('Deletes one rule'), which cleanly separates it from add_group_rule, update_group_rule, and list_group_rules among siblings. An agent can tell exactly what it removes without opening the schema.

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?

'Admins only' gives an explicit prerequisite, and the Settings > Rules > Delete analogy makes the intended editorial context clear. It doesn't name a sibling as an alternative (e.g., list_group_rules for finding the number), but the schema parameter covers that link.

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