ghost_delete_tag

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the operation is permanent and irreversible, which is critical behavioral info. However, it omits potential side effects (e.g., cascading removal from posts), authorization requirements, or success/failure indicators, leaving gaps.

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 two sentences, front-loading the action ('Deletes a tag') and immediately adding the critical behavioral note about permanence. No filler or redundant information, earning its place efficiently.

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 single-parameter delete tool with no annotations or output schema, the description provides the core action and durability warning. However, it lacks context about what the response looks like or any error handling, making it adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

The schema has one parameter 'id' with 0% description coverage. The description only says 'by ID', adding no extra meaning beyond the schema's pattern. It does not explain what the ID represents (e.g., a Ghost tag ID) or how to obtain it, which is insufficient given the low schema 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?

The description clearly states the verb ('Deletes') and resource ('tag from Ghost CMS by ID'), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create, get, or update tags, and other delete operations (e.g., ghost_delete_member) by mentioning 'tag'.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any pointers about prerequisites or contraindications (e.g., what happens if a tag is attached to posts). It simply states the action without context for decision-making.

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