beta_feedback_screenshot_submissions__delete

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the destructive nature is covered. The description adds the HTTP DELETE method but does not elaborate on side effects, consequences, or required permissions. It does not contradict annotations and provides minimal additional behavioral context beyond the structured data.

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 exceptionally concise: two sentences, each earning its place. It states the operation, the target resource, and the endpoint, with zero filler or redundancy.

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 delete operation with a single parameter and no output schema, the description is fully sufficient. It covers the action, resource, and endpoint, while the schema covers parameter semantics. No additional context is needed.

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 tool description itself does not add parameter details, but the schema provides 100% coverage with a helpful description ('ID from the matching list call.') telling the agent where to obtain the ID. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage, but the description does not go beyond what the schema already provides.

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 states the action ('Delete'), the resource ('a beta feedback screenshot submission'), and includes the HTTP endpoint. It is unambiguous and distinct from sibling tools like the crash submission delete or listing/getting screenshot submissions.

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 usage context is clear: use this to delete a specific screenshot submission. The parameter description in the schema adds the prerequisite of getting the ID from a list call. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternative operations (e.g., get, list) or mention when not to use it, so it falls short of a 5.

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