delete_draft

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the refusal behavior for published posts, explains the shared endpoint, and highlights irreversibility for live posts. However, it does not explicitly state whether draft deletion is permanent, though 'delete' implies 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?

Two sentences, action-first, with the caveat clearly stated. Every word earns its place; no redundancy or filler.

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 delete tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage boundaries, and a critical behavioral caveat. It omits return values, but that is arguably secondary for a destructive operation; the essentials are well covered.

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 already provides a detailed description for draft_id (100% coverage), including provenance from list_posts or create_draft_post. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond referencing the id's association with published posts, which is behavior rather than parameter semantics.

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The description uses a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('unpublished draft'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like publish_draft or get_draft. It also adds scope ('unpublished') and explicitly states what it refuses to do, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.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?

The description explicitly says when to use the tool (delete unpublished drafts) and when not to (refuses published posts). It also provides an alternative (the dashboard) and explains the rationale, giving clear guidance for tool selection.

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