channels_delete

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses permanent deletion, required scopes/manifest, and provides a required field with example. Lacks rate limits or error details but sufficient for a deletion action.

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: purpose sentence, requirements, warning, required fields, and example. Each sentence earns its place with no fluff.

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 1-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description covers purpose, prerequisites, irreversibility, and parameter details comprehensively. No gaps.

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 one parameter 'id' described. Description adds an integration-specific phrase and a concrete example, adding value beyond the schema.

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 'Delete an existing messenger's channel and all related entities (conversations and messages)', specifying the verb (delete) and resource (channel) with scope. Among sibling tools (channels_create, channels_delete_conversation), it is distinct.

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?

It specifies required OAuth scope and Messaging manifest, and warns about irreversibility. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like channels_delete_conversation, though this is implied.

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