Delete document

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose a key behavioral distinction: archive=true moves to trash, otherwise it is permanently deleted. Yet it omits consequences like whether trash items are recoverable, permission requirements, cascading effects on comments, or what response is returned.

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 with no filler. The primary statement is front-loaded, and the conditional behavioral detail is placed in the second sentence. Every word earns its place.

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 delete tool with two parameters and no nested objects, the description is largely complete: it identifies the action, required resource, and the important archive distinction. It could mention side effects on related resources or error conditions, but those are secondary for basic invocation.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description adds only modest interpretation by rewording the archive flag ('moved to trash instead of being permanently deleted'), which is essentially the same as the schema's 'Archive instead of hard-delete.' Therefore baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Delete a document.' It also clarifies the two possible outcomes (trash vs permanent deletion), which distinguishes it from siblings like create_document and update_document. However, it does not explicitly name or contrast itself with sibling tools.

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 tool's purpose is implied by its name and description: use when a document should be removed. The archive condition provides parameter-level guidance but no explicit when-to-use versus alternatives like update_document or list_documents. There are no exclusions or prerequisites mentioned.

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