Delete a changelog entry

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

Annotations already indicate destructive behavior via destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false. The description adds meaningful nuance by stating the deletion is permanent and leaves no tombstone, which goes beyond what the annotation flags alone would tell an agent.

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?

Three short, purposeful sentences. The destructive semantics are front-loaded, followed by use-case guidance and the alternative routing. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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 tool with one fully documented parameter, clear destructive annotations, and no output schema, the description provides everything needed to select and invoke the tool correctly. It covers what, why, when, and which sibling to prefer instead.

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 fully documents the single parameter entryId with its source ('from list_changelog'). The description does not add parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate given the high schema coverage.

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?

States a specific verb ('Deletes'), a specific resource ('changelog entry'), and the key behavioral distinction ('outright — no tombstone, nothing left on the page'). It also clearly differentiates from update_changelog_entry, so an agent knows exactly what this tool does.

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?

Explicitly names the scenarios for use ('wrong game or wrong version number') and the preferred alternative when those conditions do not apply ('Prefer update_changelog_entry when the entry is right and its wording is wrong'). This is strong routing guidance.

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