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

No annotations provided, so description must bear full burden. It states 'delete' implying irreversible removal, but does not disclose whether undoable, if it requires confirmation, or if it affects other models. No side effects mentioned.

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?

Very concise: one sentence, aliases, example. No redundant words. Front-loaded with action and resource.

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 tool with no annotations and a single cryptic parameter, the description lacks completeness. It does not explain the output (though output schema exists), spec language, or permanence. Agent cannot confidently use this tool without more detail.

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 schema has one parameter 'spec' with 0% description coverage. The description adds an example format '/A:501' but does not explain the selection syntax or accepted patterns. The example is helpful but insufficient for complex spec strings.

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 it deletes atoms or residues matching a spec, with an example. The verb 'delete' is specific, and the resource is atoms/residues, distinguishing it from siblings like 'hide_atoms' (non-destructive) and 'mutate_residue' (modification).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., hide_atoms for non-destructive hiding). No when-not-to or prerequisites mentioned. The example shows a spec format but does not explain context.

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