blog_supprimer_commentaire

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false, so the mutation profile is covered. The description adds one useful behavioral detail beyond annotations: that only the caller's own comment is deleted. It says nothing about reversibility, effects on replies, or confirmation requirements.

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 efficient sentence with the action and resource front-loaded and no filler. It is appropriately sized, if minimal.

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 destructive three-parameter tool with zero parameter documentation and no output schema, the description is too thin. It omits ownership requirements, error behavior, and any indication of what a successful deletion returns or whether it can be undone.

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% and none of the three required parameters (blog_id, billet_id, commentaire_id) are documented in the description. The parameter names are largely self-explanatory, but the description does nothing to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 verb (supprime) and resource (commentaire sur un billet de blog) with the scope qualifier 'un de vos'. It is clear what the tool does, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling read/list tools like blog_commentaires or blog_commenter.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives. The phrase 'un de vos commentaires' hints at an ownership restriction but does not state it as a rule or explain what happens when the comment is not yours.

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