evidence_case_file_delete_bulk

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, but the description adds 'Permanently deletes' and 'not reversible', reinforcing finality. It also adds a practical warning to confirm IDs first, which goes beyond the structured annotations. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then critical warnings and alternatives. Every sentence provides necessary information with no fluff 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?

Despite no output schema, the description fully addresses the tool's use case: what it does, its irreversibility, how to confirm inputs, and a safer alternative. It is complete for a destructive bulk-delete operation with two parameters.

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 covers requestId with description and ids with format and constraints; description maps 'ids' to 'caseFileIds' adding semantic context. However, it doesn't explain parameter behavior beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., max 100 items, UUID format). Coverage is 50%, and description partially compensates.

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 uses a specific verb ('deletes') and resource ('case files') with a clear scope ('SEVERAL... in one call'). It explicitly distinguishes from siblings by emphasizing bulk deletion and permanence, and names the alternative tool for closing case files.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use (permanently delete several case files), when-not-to-use (prefer status update for ending work), and a prerequisite (confirm IDs via evidence_case_file_search). This is model guidance for tool selection.

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