Borrar pregunta de quiz

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and non-read-only, so "irreversible" largely restates what the agent already knows; the small added value is the "Equipo del aula" scope cue. The description does not say whether other questions are reordered, whether student progress/answers are affected, or what the response contains — relevant gaps for a destructive call.

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 compact sentence with the scope and irreversibility tags front-loaded, so nothing is wasted. It errs toward terseness — the bracketed prefix consumes a large share of an already minimal body.

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 two-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the essentials (what it deletes, that it is irreversible) are covered and annotations carry the safety profile. Still missing are the effects on the quiz structure and student data, and any note about confirmation or idempotency, which matter for an irreversible operation.

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% and both parameters (question_id "Pregunta", classroom_id "Aula") are documented in the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no format, scoping or referential detail beyond what the schema provides, and its mention of "una lección" introduces a lesson concept that has no corresponding parameter.

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: "Borra una pregunta del quiz de una lección", which lets an agent distinguish it from save_quiz_question, delete_self_check_question and delete_flashcard (those cover other item types). It never names a sibling explicitly, so differentiation comes from the object noun rather than from routing guidance.

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?

"irreversible" signals caution and "Equipo del aula" hints at the classroom-team scope, but there is no statement of when to delete versus re-save/update the question, no prerequisites, and no alternative named. The agent is left to infer everything about eligibility from the annotation set.

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