plu_delete_conversation

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It discloses that the action requires user confirmation and implies a destructive operation, but lacks details on reversibility (trash vs permanent delete), side effects, or authorization needs.

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?

Extremely concise with two short sentences. No unnecessary words; each sentence adds value (the action and a critical usage guideline).

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one required param, no output schema), the description covers the basic purpose and a key behavioral requirement (confirmation). However, it does not describe the return value or confirm whether the operation is permanent, leaving some gaps.

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 description does not add any meaning to the single parameter 'chatId' beyond what the schema provides. Schema coverage is 0%, and the description fails to clarify what chatId represents (e.g., conversation ID).

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/trash a conversation') and distinguishes it from sibling tools like plu_delete_message which targets a message, not the entire conversation.

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?

Provides a usage guideline ('Ask user confirmation') but does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives or what not to do. Implied that it should be used for deleting conversations with user consent.

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