delete_dm_message

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds detail about the permanent nature ('cannot be undone') and the dm name resolution behavior, providing context beyond annotations.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, no unnecessary words. Every sentence adds useful 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?

For a simple delete tool with two parameters and an output schema, the description covers key behavioral aspects (permanence, dm argument semantics). Missing details like error handling or permissions are partially covered by annotations.

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 descriptions are minimal ('a string that will be trimmed'). The description compensates by explaining the `dm` parameter's dual ID/name acceptance and resolution behavior, adding significant semantic value despite schema coverage being 100%.

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 clearly states the tool deletes a direct-message message permanently. It identifies the specific resource (DM message) and action, distinguishing it from siblings like delete_channel_message or delete_comment.

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 explains the `dm` parameter accepts either an ID or a display name, clarifying it's for one-to-one DMs. This implicitly differentiates from channel messages, but lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance compared to alternatives.

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