Delete Comment

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

Goes well beyond annotations with cascade semantics ('deleting a top-level comment deletes its replies'), the no-op behavior when confirm is omitted, and an explicit quota cost (52 units). These are exactly the traits annotations (destructive/idempotent) cannot convey.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the destructive action, then the alternative, then the confirmation gate, then quota. No filler or restatement of the title.

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?

Covers ownership limits, cascade effects, the confirmation requirement, the alternative tool, and quota cost; with an output schema present, return-value detail is correctly omitted. Nothing needed to call this safely 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?

Schema coverage is 100% so the baseline is 3, and the description adds genuine value by explaining the runtime consequence of omitting confirm ('nothing is deleted and the error describes the comment'), turning a schema note into actionable behavior. It does not add anything for my_channel beyond the schema.

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 and resource ('Permanently delete ... comments or replies') and immediately scopes ownership ('one of your own'), which cleanly separates it from the redaction path for others' comments. An agent can distinguish this from reject_comments without opening a schema.

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 alternative path and the condition that selects it: others' comments on your videos 'can't be deleted, only rejected, which hides them.' It also documents the confirm gate as a precondition, so the agent knows the two-step invocation sequence.

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