delete_message

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose two important traits: it is destructive and requires confirmation. However, it does not clarify irreversibility, permission requirements, or why confirmationToken is optional while the description says a confirmation code is required.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the critical safety constraint. There is no wasted text.

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?

The schema is rich and the description covers the destructive nature and confirmation requirement. Still, for a deletion tool with no annotations and no output schema, it leaves out irreversibility, failure behavior, and how the optional confirmationToken relates to the stated confirmation requirement.

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 100%, so messageId, channelIdentifier, confirm, and confirmationToken are already documented in the schema. The description only restates that deletion is by ID in a channel and adds no parameter-level detail beyond that baseline.

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 states a specific verb and resource: delete a message by ID in a channel. It is clearly distinguishable from edit_message and delete_scheduled_message by resource, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or scope boundaries.

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 says the operation is destructive and requires a confirmation code, but gives no guidance on when to use this versus edit_message, when not to delete, or what prerequisite conditions must be met beyond confirmation.

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