Delete list

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond them: "Permanently" confirms irreversibility, and the parenthetical specifies which list types are rejected, which annotations cannot express. It does not describe the failure response when a non-deletable list is targeted.

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?

A single sentence with the verb and the object front-loaded, and the constraint packed into a parenthetical. No filler or restated title padding.

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 one-parameter destructive tool with full annotation coverage and no output schema, the definition supplies the essentials: permanence, target resource, and eligible list types. Only the behavior on invalid/non-deletable IDs is unaddressed.

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?

There is a single parameter (list_id) with 100% schema description coverage ("Numeric MDBList list ID"), so the schema already carries the semantics. The description adds no format, range or acquisition hints beyond what the schema states, which is the baseline-3 case for high coverage.

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 (delete) and resource (the user's static lists), and narrows the scope by excluding dynamic, official and external lists. This lets an agent distinguish it from read-oriented siblings like get_list or get_user_lists, though it never names an alternative explicitly.

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?

"Permanently delete one of the user's static lists" plus the parenthetical exclusion gives a clear condition for use and a clear when-not. It stops short of routing the agent to alternatives (e.g. remove_list_items for partial removal, create_list for creation), so it is clear context without full alternative guidance.

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