delete_announcement

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

With no annotations, the description correctly carries the burden of behavioral disclosure: it warns that an API token is required and that the operation cannot be undone. This tells the agent the operation is authenticated and destructive, though it does not detail side effects or error behavior.

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?

Three short sentences deliver exactly the essential information: the operation, the auth requirement, and the irreversibility. There is no filler or redundancy.

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 single-parameter delete tool with no output schema, the description covers the action, required auth, and permanence. It is complete enough to call correctly, though a brief statement of what the response indicates or one-sentence usage context would make it fully robust.

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 input schema already documents the only parameter 'id' at 100% coverage, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no parameter-specific detail, but none is needed beyond the schema.

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 action, 'お知らせを削除します' (delete announcement), with a clear resource. This unambiguously differentiates it from sibling tools like create_announcement, update_announcement, and list_announcements.

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 intended use is implied by the delete verb and announcement resource, but there is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over alternatives or any exclusions. The prerequisites (API token) and irreversibility are noted, but not the situational trigger.

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