delete_news

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 context beyond them by disclosing that comments and attachments are destroyed along with the entry and that the deletion is irreversible. It stops short of noting permission requirements or what confirmation the call returns.

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 front-loaded sentence naming the action, its cascade effects, and its irreversibility. No filler and nothing important buried.

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 full schema coverage, no output schema, and strong annotations, the description supplies the one thing structured data cannot: the cascade and irreversibility. Only minor gaps remain, such as permissions or how to locate a valid news_id.

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 the confirm parameter's description already spells out the preview-then-approve workflow, so the schema carries the parameter burden. The description adds nothing about news_id provenance (e.g. that it comes from list_news) or the confirm flag, making this a baseline 3.

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 ("Delete a news entry") and adds scope detail about the cascade to comments and attachments. The resource name alone separates it from the many other delete_* siblings, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with them or with update_news/create_news.

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 gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as update_news or list_news for locating the target. The only usage signal is the implicit caution from "cannot be undone," and the confirm-preview workflow lives entirely in the schema rather than the description.

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