Delete tag

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

The annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, and the description adds genuinely new context: the assets themselves survive, and the deletion is permanent and irreversible. That "assets unaffected" note is the key behavioral fact an agent cannot get from the annotations, though nothing is said about side effects on stacks, albums, or shared links that may reference the tag.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then the durability of the assets, then the irreversibility caveat. Slight waste in "permanently deletes the tag (cannot be undone)" which restates destructiveHint, and the Args/Returns scaffolding is heavier than a one-parameter tool needs.

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?

Output schema exists, so the Returns line is mostly redundant, but the description covers the action, its blast radius, irreversibility, and the parameter format. Complete enough for a low-complexity destructive tool; only missing guidance on where tag_id comes from.

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 0% – the schema only says "Tag Id" of type string – so the description's "The tag's UUID to delete" adds real meaning by specifying the accepted identifier format (UUID, not name). For a single required parameter this is near-complete, though it doesn't say how to obtain the UUID (list_tags/get_tag).

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?

"Delete a tag and remove it from all assets" is a specific verb + resource with a scope qualifier that distinguishes it from untag_assets and remove_assets_from_album (which operate on specific assets). Sibling names are not called out explicitly, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

Usage is implied by "remove it from all assets" – an agent can infer this is the whole-tag path versus untag_assets for selective removal – but the description never states when to choose it over update_tag or untag_assets, nor any prerequisites such as permissions.

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