delete_topic_directory

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does disclose the two most important traits: the operation is destructive and requires user confirmation beforehand. It omits permission requirements, error behavior when the folder is not empty, and whether the deletion is reversible.

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, zero waste, with the destructive qualifier and confirmation requirement front-loaded where an agent will read them.

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 behavioral side is adequately covered for a simple two-parameter destructive tool, but the total absence of parameter documentation and of any output/error expectations leaves a real gap given no annotations and no output schema.

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 compensate, and it does not: neither topic_id nor directory_id is explained (e.g., where to obtain the directory_id, whether it is scoped to topic_id).

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?

States a specific verb and resource (delete a knowledge-base folder) plus a key qualifier that the folder must be empty. It doesn't explicitly contrast with create_topic_directory or update_topic_directory, but the verb makes the distinction obvious.

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 'empty folder' precondition and the mandatory user-confirmation step give real guidance on when to call. No alternative (e.g., update_topic_directory for non-empty folders, or listing first via list_topic_directories) is named, so the agent must infer the fallback path.

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