delete-comment

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Delete' implies a destructive mutation, but the description doesn't specify whether deletion is permanent/reversible, what permissions are required, whether it affects related data (like reactions), or what happens on success/failure. This leaves significant behavioral gaps for a destructive 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?

The description is maximally concise at just 4 words, with zero wasted language. Every word ('Delete a Liveblocks comment') directly contributes to understanding the tool's purpose. It's appropriately sized for what it communicates, though it could benefit from additional context.

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 destructive mutation tool with 3 undocumented parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It doesn't address critical context like permissions, side effects, error conditions, or return values. The agent would need to guess about many aspects of this tool's behavior and requirements.

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 0%, meaning none of the 3 parameters (roomId, threadId, commentId) have descriptions in the schema. The tool description provides no additional parameter information - it doesn't explain what these IDs represent, their format, or how they relate hierarchically (e.g., comment within thread within room). The description fails to compensate for the complete lack of schema documentation.

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 clearly states the action ('Delete') and the resource ('a Liveblocks comment'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't differentiate this tool from sibling deletion tools like delete-room or delete-thread, which would require mentioning what distinguishes comment deletion from other deletion operations.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There's no mention of prerequisites (like needing specific permissions), when deletion is appropriate versus editing, or how this relates to other comment operations like edit-comment or get-comment. The agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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