jekyll_component_delete

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it flags DESTRUCTIVE in caps, enumerates the file types destroyed, and states the two gates (confirm flag, full-write mode). It omits irreversibility and permission/rollback detail, but the destruction scope is unusually well disclosed.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and destruction warning. 'Prefer dry reasoning before calling' is slightly vague and is the only clause that does not fully earn its place.

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 destructive two-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the definition covers scope, safety gates, and mode prerequisites. Missing only irreversibility and any note on return/error behavior, which are minor given the description's density.

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 50%: 'confirm' is documented in the schema as 'Must be true to proceed', and the description reinforces that. The 'name' parameter has no schema description and the description never clarifies what identifies the component, so the low-coverage gap is only partially compensated.

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 (component) and enumerates the exact artifacts removed (Liquid, SCSS, JS, docs, example). This clearly separates it from siblings like jekyll_component_create, jekyll_component_get, and jekyll_component_validate.

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 concrete preconditions (confirm: true, full-write mode) and a caution to reason dry before calling. It does not name an alternative flow (e.g., validate or get before delete), so it stops short of explicit when-not guidance.

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