evidence_delete

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and the description reinforces 'Permanently deletes' and 'Destructive.' It adds behavioral context about sealed content and the 'no group path needed' distinction, going beyond 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 caution and prerequisite. Every sentence earns its place with no wasted words.

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 one-parameter delete tool with strong annotations, the description covers purpose, usage constraints, prerequisites, and destructive nature. No output schema exists but none is needed for a delete operation; the description is fully adequate.

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% with a detailed description of the evidenceId parameter, so the baseline is 3. The description repeats how to obtain the ID and adds 'no group path needed' context, but does not add substantial new parameter semantics.

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+resource+scope: 'Permanently deletes one evidence by evidenceId (no group path needed).' It distinguishes from siblings like evidence_group_evidence_delete by explicitly noting no group path is required, and from bulk operations by saying 'one evidence.'

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?

Clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance: 'sealed content should not be deleted — use only for drafts or mis-registered evidence.' Also specifies prerequisite: 'Requires: evidence_group_evidence_register or generate_evidence → evidenceId.'

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