Delete a problem draft

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

The description goes beyond the annotations by specifying exactly what gets destroyed (statement, test cases, solutions, generators) and emphasizing irreversibility. This aligns with destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and adds concrete behavioral context an agent needs before calling.

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 with no filler. The core destructive behavior and contents are stated first, and the user-confirmation requirement is added immediately after. Every clause 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?

For a single-parameter destructive tool with a complete input schema and an output schema available, the description covers all essential context: what is deleted, the scope of deletion, irreversibility, and the need for user confirmation. Nothing critical is missing.

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?

The input schema already fully documents the single parameter 'session_id' with the description 'Build session id to delete.' The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 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 states a specific action ('Permanently delete') on a specific resource ('a problem draft') and enumerates what it contains. This clearly differentiates it from sibling delete tools that target narrower pieces like generators or testcases.

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 gives explicit usage guidance: 'confirm with the user before calling.' It does not explicitly enumerate alternatives or when-not-to-use cases, but the destructive, irreversible nature is clearly flagged, which is the key conditional for invoking this tool.

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