delete_multiple_nodes

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses two useful traits: the target-frame scoping restriction and the guard requiring confirmFrameOrPageDeletion for pages/top-level frames. It omits irreversibility, child-node handling, and undo/checkpoint behavior, which matter for a destructive bulk operation.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and followed by the exception condition. No filler or redundancy.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description covers scope and the confirmation guard but leaves out reversibility, partial-failure behavior, and the outcome/return. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 50%: confirmFrameOrPageDeletion is documented in the schema, but nodeIds is undocumented. The description partially compensates by describing nodeIds as the deletion targets and noting the target-frame restriction, but adds no format detail (e.g., must all be in the same frame) beyond that.

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 specific verb and resource ('Delete multiple nodes by nodeIds'), and the plural 'multiple' implicitly distinguishes it from the sibling delete_node. It does not explicitly name delete_node or delete_page as alternatives, so an agent must infer the routing, but the core purpose is unambiguous.

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?

It gives one usage constraint ('only within the allowed target frame') and a conditional prerequisite for pages/top-level frames, which is genuine context. However, it never says when to prefer this over delete_node or delete_page, nor what to do if a nodeId falls outside the target frame.

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