LightCMS

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

While the destructiveHint annotation confirms this is destructive, the description adds no behavioral context about what happens to content referencing the deleted snippet, whether this is a hard delete or soft delete, or error conditions if the ID is not found.

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 four-word description is efficiently front-loaded with no redundant information. However, extreme brevity for a destructive operation leaves it under-specified for the risk level involved.

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?

Given the simple single-parameter input and lack of output schema, the description minimally covers the operation but omits critical context for a destructive tool: cascading effects, restore possibilities, and return status expectations.

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?

With 100% schema coverage describing the MongoDB ObjectID requirement, the description meets the baseline. It mentions 'by ID' which aligns with the schema but adds no additional semantic context about ID format constraints or validation beyond the schema definition.

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 (Delete) and resource (snippet), distinguishing it from sibling delete operations on assets, collections, or folders. However, it lacks explicit scoping details that would elevate it to a 5, such as clarifying this is for permanent single-item removal versus archiving.

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 like bulk_field_operation, nor does it mention prerequisites (e.g., whether the snippet must be unreferenced first) or irreversibility warnings beyond the annotation.

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