delete-comment

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: deletion is permanent ('Permanently'), there is a quota cost ('Costs 50 quota units'), and a confirmation safeguard exists ('Requires confirm: true'). It does not cover error handling or permissions, but the most critical destructive traits are addressed.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by cost and safety conditions. Every word earns its place, with 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 simple two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, cost, and a key prerequisite. It is brief but sufficient for typical use, though it omits secondary details such as error behavior or idempotency.

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 input schema already covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no new parameter semantics beyond restating the confirmation requirement, though it does emphasize it verbally.

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 uses a specific verb 'delete' with a clear resource 'comment' and adds 'Permanently' to convey irreversibility. It distinguishes itself from sibling comment tools like 'update-comment' and 'list-comments' by naming the exact action.

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 provides clear context that confirmation is required ('Requires confirm: true'), which is a necessary usage condition. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or point to alternatives, missing the top tier of explicit when/when-not guidance.

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