forget

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It states the operation is permanent and destructive, covering the key side effect (deletion of connections). However, it does not mention any prerequisites, error handling, or authorization needs, which is a minor gap for a mutating tool.

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 concise sentences deliver the function and usage guidance without wasted words. The core action is front-loaded, and the additional guidance is placed after, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 single-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description provides everything needed to invoke it correctly: what it does, when to use it, and when not to. The scope of deletion (node and connections) is explicitly stated, and the permanence is clear.

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 single parameter node_id is left entirely to the schema, which only specifies it as a string. The description does not elaborate on its format or semantics, but the tool's purpose makes the meaning obvious. The baseline for low schema coverage is compensated by the tool's simplicity and the clear function.

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 begins with 'Permanently delete a node and its connections,' a clear verb (delete) and resource (node) with a specific scope (connections). This unambiguously differentiates it from all siblings, none of which perform deletion.

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 second sentence explicitly contrasts this tool with the preferred decay + review queue process, and states the condition for use: 'only for deliberate deletion.' This gives clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance, and implies the alternative.

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