emacs_workspace_delete

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for disclosing side effects. It only says 'delete', implying destructiveness, but does not state irreversibility, effects on tabs/buffers, errors for missing names, or whether deletion is idempotent. A destructive tool needs at least one caveat.

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 five words and completely front-loaded. There is no redundant or speculative content; every part directly identifies what the tool does.

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 one-parameter destructive operation with no nested objects or output schema, this is minimally viable: an agent can identify the action and the required input. However, it lacks context about consequences, error behavior, or any restrictions on deleting a workspace, which prevents it from being fully complete.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100% and the single parameter is already described as 'Workspace name to delete'. The description adds only the synonym 'tad' and no extra format, constraint, or behavioral context, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 a workspace/tab'. This is clear and differs from sibling tools by naming deletion rather than list/switch/create/save. It does not explicitly name an alternative, but the 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?

No usage guidance is provided. The description does not say when to prefer this tool over workspace_create, workspace_switch, or workspace_list, nor does it mention conditions like 'cannot deletes current workspace'. The agent must infer appropriateness from the single verb.

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