Delete Workspace

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

The description adds significant behavioral context beyond the annotations. Annotations already mark the operation as destructive, but the description specifies that deletion is permanent and that success is only reported when AFFiNE confirms the mutation. This informs the agent about the irreversible nature and the confirmation mechanism, which is not present in the structured annotations.

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, concise sentence that clearly conveys the core action and a critical behavioral nuance. Every word contributes meaning, with no fluff or repetition. It is well front-loaded with the primary 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 deletion tool, the description is sufficiently complete given the rich annotations and output schema. It covers the key aspects: permanence and confirmation behavior. It does not discuss side effects on workspace contents, but that is likely unnecessary for this tool's context. The existence of an output schema also reduces the need to describe return values.

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%, with both 'id' and 'confirmWorkspaceId' fully described in the input schema. The description itself does not directly elaborate on the parameters, but it does provide a high-level hint about the confirmation requirement ('report success only when AFFiNE confirms the mutation'), which aligns with the purpose of 'confirmWorkspaceId.' Since the schema already handles the parameter details, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool's action with a specific verb and resource: 'Delete a workspace permanently.' It goes beyond simply restating the name by adding the 'permanently' qualifier, which distinguishes it from temporary hide or update operations. This also differentiates it from sibling tools like update_workspace or create_workspace.

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?

The description implies usage context: this tool is for permanently deleting a workspace. It doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or mention alternatives, but the verb 'delete' and the permanent qualifier make the intended use clear. Given the sibling list, an agent could infer that for modifications, update_workspace is appropriate, but the description itself provides no exclusions.

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