delete_link

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet only the word "Delete" signals mutation. It says nothing about whether deletion is permanent, whether link analytics/history are also destroyed, what permissions are required, or whether the operation is recoverable.

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?

It is a single front-loaded sentence with zero wasted words. However, the brevity reflects under-specification rather than efficient communication of the essentials for a destructive operation.

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 destructive, irreversible-by-implication mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the description omits permissions, side effects, and confirmation behavior. The single parameter is simple, but the risk profile of the tool is entirely undocumented.

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 0% and the sole parameter (linkId) is never mentioned in the description. Only the schema's own property name and uuid format communicate its meaning, so the description adds nothing to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 ("Delete" + "tracked link"), which is unambiguous against siblings like delete_pixel or delete_share. It lacks any explicit sibling differentiation or scope statement, but the action is clear.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no warning about irreversibility. An agent must infer everything about when deletion is appropriate.

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