Delete Agency Website

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

The description simply repeats the destructive nature already indicated by the destructiveHint annotation, adding no new behavioral context such as irreversibility, cascading effects on domains or databases, or required permissions. It provides no value beyond the annotation.

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 with no unnecessary words or repetition. It is concise and immediately conveys the core purpose.

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 one-parameter delete operation with a destructive annotation, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks any mention of what happens to associated resources (e.g., domains, databases) or whether the operation is reversible, which could be important for a destructive action.

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 input schema covers 100% of the parameter (website_uid) with a description, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional meaning or context about the parameter beyond what the schema already provides.

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') and the resource ('an Agency Plan website'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like agency_website_provision or hosting_websites_delete. It does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives, but the 'Agency Plan' qualifier gives enough specificity.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus similar deletion or website management tools such as agency_website_provision, hosting_websites_delete, or agency_website_get. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative scenarios.

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