delete_chat_message

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It clearly declares destructive behavior ('Permanently delete', 'cannot be undone') and confirms return value. However, it omits details like required permissions or potential side effects on related data (e.g., replies).

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 two sentences with no wasted words. Each sentence serves a purpose: identifying the tool and declaring its permanence and return value. It is appropriately sized.

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 2-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, destructiveness, and return. It lacks information about error cases (e.g., message not found) or prerequisites, but these are commonly implied for deletion tools.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the fallback behavior for team_id ('Falls back to CLICKUP_TEAM_ID when omitted'), which is not in the schema description. This extra context elevates the score.

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 (Chat message by id), and includes version info (ClickUp Chat v3). It distinguishes itself from sibling delete tools like delete_comment or delete_task by specifying 'Chat message'.

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 description mentions permanence ('cannot be undone'), which implies when to use, but it does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternative tools like update_chat_message. The context is clear but lacks explicit exclusions.

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