Delete post or comment

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, so the bar is lower, yet the description adds real value: it discloses the cascade (deleting a post also destroys its comments), that there is no trash and the action is irreversible, and the authorization model required. That is exactly the 'what gets destroyed' context the annotations cannot express.

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 cascade consequence. Minor filler in the aside 'as Skool's Delete does' that does not help an agent decide or call, but nothing is buried or redundant.

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 2-parameter, fully documented, non-idempotent destructive tool with rich annotations and no output schema, the description covers everything an agent needs: what it removes, what goes with it, who may do it, and that it cannot be undone.

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 that post_id may be either a post_id from list_posts or a comment_id from get_post. The description restates this ('pass its comment_id') but adds no syntax, format, or edge-case detail beyond the structured field text, so 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete a post or a comment') and immediately scopes the two modes of operation: a whole post with its comments, or a single comment passed via comment_id. The resource type alone separates it from the other delete_* siblings (delete_event, delete_category, delete_group_link).

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?

Gives clear permission-based guidance: your own content always, anyone's content only when you are a group admin or moderator. It does not name alternative tools or say when to prefer update_post / set_post_comments instead of deleting, so it stops short of full when/when-not routing.

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