delete_tag

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

Even though destructiveHint is already annotated, the description adds crucial behavior: irreversibility ('Cannot be undone through this server'), precise scope ('from every item in the library that carries it'), and version-check details ('no caller-supplied version to check...'). 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?

The description is two compact paragraphs, front-loaded with 'DESTRUCTIVE' and the scope of the operation. Every sentence earns its place, including the useful comparison to other delete tools.

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 one-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers scope, irreversibility, alternative tools, and server-side version behavior. This is sufficient for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 description clarifies that the single 'tag' parameter refers to the tag carried by items, but it does not specify exact-match semantics, formatting, or whether it is a tag name vs. ID. With 0% schema description coverage, the description provides only basic meaning and leaves some ambiguity.

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 opens with 'DESTRUCTIVE -- permanently removes this tag from every item in the library that carries it', a specific verb+resource+scope. It explicitly contrasts with 'remove_tags' ('not one item') and with delete_item_permanently/delete_collection, distinguishing it from sibling tools.

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 gives explicit when-not-to-use guidance: 'not one item -- see remove_tags for that.' It also compares the tool to delete_item_permanently/delete_collection regarding version-check behavior, helping an agent choose among delete-related tools.

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