Delete Wiki Page

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, and the description is consistent. It adds the behavioral detail that a recovery token is returned, which goes beyond the annotation. However, it doesn't elaborate on consequences like deleted comments or descendants, so it adds some but not rich 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?

A single sentence that is direct and informative. It highlights the core action and the notable return value without filler. Every word earns 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?

With destructive annotation and an output schema present, the description covers the main purpose and key behavior. The recovery token is mentioned. For a simple deletion tool, this is sufficient.

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 description coverage is 100%: both slug and page_id have descriptions explaining the either/or requirement. The tool description adds no additional parameter detail, so the 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?

The description uses a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('Yandex Wiki page'), and adds a distinctive outcome ('return a recovery token'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like page_recover or grid_delete.

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 intended use is obvious: when you want to delete a wiki page. It does not explicitly mention alternatives like page_recover for restoring, but the recovery token hints at reversibility. The context is clear, though not without explicit exclusions.

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