Delete a skill category

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

Annotations already mark the tool as destructive and non-read-only. The description adds the meaningful behavioral detail that calling it returns SKILL_CATEGORY_NOT_EMPTY (409) if skills remain, which helps the agent anticipate failure modes. It does not contradict any annotation.

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 core guidance is compact and valuable, with the permanent-deletion fact and error condition in one clear sentence. The opening line 'Delete a skill category' merely repeats the title, but the overall description remains tight and readable.

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 tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior and the main failure case. It could mention the success response shape, but this is not critical for correct invocation.

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 already documents the single id parameter with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description references the category context but does not add further parameter-level meaning beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Permanently deletes a skill category.' It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like deleteSkill by referring to the category concept and the skills-belonging dependency.

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 gives clear usage context by stating the prerequisite: remove or move all skills before deleting the category. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the condition for successful use is concrete and actionable.

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