Delete bot data (permanent)

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description discloses that deletion is permanent and irreversible, that it fires a data_deletion webhook, and that it requires explicit user consent. This gives an agent meaningful behavioral context 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?

Two sentences carry all essential information: the action, the scope, the irreversibility, the webhook side effect, and the invocation condition. There is no filler or repetition beyond the acceptable emphasis on permanence.

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 destructive tool with two required parameters and no output schema, this description is complete. An agent knows what will be deleted, that it is permanent, that a webhook fires, and that explicit user consent is required, so it can decide whether and how to invoke the tool.

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 50%; the confirm parameter is already well documented in the schema. The description reinforces the consent requirement and clarifies what data is affected, but it does not elaborate on bot_id or add parameter-level detail that meaningfully compensates for the undocumented parameter.

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 names a specific verb and resource: permanently delete a bot's audio, video, and transcripts. It is clear about scope and permanence, though it does not explicitly compare itself to the sibling remove_bot, leaving the agent to infer the difference from the data-vs-bot naming.

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 gives a clear usage boundary: only call when the user explicitly asks to delete data. This implies when not to use it, but it does not name alternative tools like remove_bot or explain how choosing between them should be decided.

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