delete_tweet

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

Annotations are thin (destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false) and could mislead, but the description supplies the missing behavior: deletion is permanent, cannot be undone, and is only staged here pending approve_draft. It also discloses the exact-match guard ("supply its current text") and the media-only empty-string convention.

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?

Three short sentences, zero filler, with the destructive nature and the approval requirement front-loaded where an agent will read them before acting.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the description covers the destructive action, its reversibility, and its approval gate. It is only slightly thin on the parameters with no schema documentation and on what happens when expected_text does not match.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning; it explains expected_text well (current text, empty for media-only) but says nothing about account or tweet_url. Those names are largely self-evident, so it partially compensates but not fully.

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?

"Prepare permanent deletion of your own exact post" gives a specific verb (prepare deletion), a precise resource (your own post), and a scope qualifier (exact / own) that separates it from siblings like edit_tweet or unlike_tweet. An agent can identify it without opening the schema.

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?

"Always requires approve_draft" names the gating sibling and the prerequisite condition for completion, and "your own" excludes posts the account does not own. It does not explicitly contrast with edit_tweet or remove_bookmark, so it falls short of full when/when-not guidance.

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