delete_site

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses two significant side effects: sources are reassigned and briefs are deleted. It also reveals an operational restriction: the last site cannot be deleted. This goes beyond a simple mutation statement, though it could mention permanence or what happens to articles under the site.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence: 'Delete a site'. The parenthetical adds critical context without clutter. Every word earns its place, and the constraint is stated directly. No redundancy or wasted space.

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 single-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers the essential elements: action, affected resources, and a key constraint. It lacks details about reversibility or response, but given the tool's simplicity and the effective schema, the description is sufficiently complete for most use cases.

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 already provides 100% coverage for the single parameter site_id with a clear description: 'Site ID to delete'. The tool description adds minimal semantic value beyond the schema, mostly the side-effect context. Baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 a site' with a specific resource. It distinguishes from sibling delete tools by noting that sources are reassigned (not deleted) and briefs are deleted, which differentiates it from delete_source and delete_brief. The additional constraint 'Cannot delete last site' further clarifies the tool's scope.

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?

Usage guidance is implied rather than explicit. The description says what the tool does but does not state when to use it over alternatives (e.g., delete_source, delete_brief). The 'Cannot delete last site' constraint provides a limited exclusion but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance.

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