akb_delete_collection

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

No annotations exist, so the description bears full burden. It discloses destructive behavior (delete), cascade delete for non-empty collections, one git commit per batch, and role requirement. Could add idempotency or error handling, but sufficient for safe invocation.

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?

Four sentences efficiently cover key aspects: action, conditional behavior, side effects, and role. No unnecessary words. Could be slightly tighter, but well-structured.

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?

Given no annotations and no output schema, the description adequately covers deletion logic, recursive flag, git commit, and role. Missing return value details but not critical for selection and 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions. The description adds context: 'recursive' is required when non-empty, and explains the cascade behavior. This adds meaning beyond the schema's 'Required when the collection is non-empty'.

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 verb 'delete' and the resource 'collection'. It distinguishes between empty and non-empty cases, and the recursive flag clarifies the scope. This differentiates from sibling tools like 'akb_delete' (single document) and 'akb_delete_vault'.

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 when to use recursive=true (non-empty collection), the required role (Writer or higher), and the batch commit behavior. It implicitly guides when not to use (e.g., avoid non-recursive delete on non-empty). However, it does not explicitly list alternatives among siblings.

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