DeleteTag

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and non-readOnly, so the safety profile is carried structurally. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: irreversibility ('can't be undone') and the side effect that items survive while the tag is detached from all of them. The only minor gap is that it doesn't note the idempotency explicitly, though annotations cover it.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and its permanent nature. Every clause earns its place: action, side-effect, irreversibility, alternative.

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 single-param destructive tool with a full schema, complete annotations, and an output schema present, the description supplies everything an agent needs: action, irreversibility, side effect on items, and the sibling routing. Nothing material is missing.

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% – tag_id is documented in the schema, including a format example and a pointer to ListTags. The description adds nothing about the parameter beyond what the schema already says, so the 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?

States a specific verb (permanently delete) and resource (a tag), with a scope clarification that the tag is removed from every item while items are kept. This distinguishes it from the sibling RenameTag and from the item-level RemoveTag.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent to the correct alternative: 'to untag a single item, use RemoveTag instead.' Combined with 'permanently delete', the when-to-use and when-not-to-use conditions are both clear.

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