Delete Comment

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: it specifies that deletion is permanent and that only the author or workspace owner can perform it. Annotations only indicate destructive nature, so description provides valuable extra details about authorization and irreversibility.

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 extremely concise: two sentences with no unnecessary words. Every phrase ('permanently delete', 'Author or workspace owner only') adds meaningful information without redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 required parameters, no output schema), the description covers essential aspects: action, permanence, and authorization. Slightly lacking explicit mention of return behavior, but for a destructive delete, it is adequate.

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 both parameters (workspaceId, commentId) described. The description does not add additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score 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 ('permanently delete a comment') and its resource, making it unambiguous. It also distinguishes from siblings like 'update_comment' by emphasizing permanence and authorization constraints.

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 provides a key usage condition ('Author or workspace owner only'), which helps agents determine if they can invoke it. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to prefer this over alternatives like 'edit/remove' or when deletion is appropriate.

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