Delete a contest (admin)

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds important behavioral detail: deletion is permanent, cascades to 'everything attached to it,' and requires admin rights. This goes beyond the structured hints and appropriately warns an agent about the consequence.

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?

The description is two sentences, front-loads the destructive scope, and includes the critical user-confirmation warning without unnecessary detail. Every sentence adds value.

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 admin-delete operation with one well-documented parameter and an output schema, the description fully covers the necessary context: what it does, what is required, and what the agent must do before invoking it.

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% and the only parameter, contest_id, is already documented in the input schema. The description adds no further parameter-specific semantics, but none are needed given the single, clearly-described identifier.

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 names a specific verb and resource: 'Permanently delete a contest and everything attached to it.' It unambiguously distinguishes itself from update_contest, get_contest, and other contest-related tools.

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 clear usage context: the caller must have contest administration rights and must confirm with the user before calling. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but for an irreversible admin delete, the prerequisites and warning are the most relevant guidance.

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