delete_collection

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

Discloses cascading deletion of sub-collections, that items are only unfiled (not deleted), and that there is no confirmation step. These details go beyond the annotations (destructiveHint=true) and add critical behavioral context for a destructive operation.

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?

Well-structured and appropriately sized for a destructive tool. The warning 'DESTRUCTIVE' is front-loaded, followed by essential consequences and then parameter specifics. No word is wasted; every sentence provides value.

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?

Given the lack of output schema and the destructive nature, the description covers all necessary context: what is deleted, what is preserved, the cascading effect, the missing confirmation step, and the optimistic concurrency mechanism. It is complete for an AI agent to make an informed decision.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, and the description compensates by thoroughly explaining the 'version' parameter (source, purpose, and rejection behavior). The 'key' parameter is not explicitly explained, but in the context of Zotero collections it is likely self-evident; still, the description could have briefly confirmed it.

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?

Clearly states it permanently deletes a collection, with specific scope (including sub-collections) and distinguishes from other delete tools (e.g., delete_item_permanently, delete_tag). The description uses a specific verb 'deletes' and names the resource 'collection', making its purpose unambiguous.

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 states when to check list_collections first (if sub-collections matter) and that there is no confirmation step. Also notes the version mismatch condition for refusal, providing clear guidance on prerequisites and when it is safe to call.

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