delete_item

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses irreversibility through 'permanently', which is important, but it omits other critical behavioral traits such as cascading deletion of relationships, files, or updates, permission requirements, or any confirmation step. This is minimal disclosure for a destructive action.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is concise and to the point, stating the action and its permanence without fluff.

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 destructive nature, the context is incomplete. It does not explain what happens to child items, associated files, or relationships after deletion, and there is no output schema to clarify the result. The description is minimal and lacks necessary warnings.

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 100%, and the baseline is 3 even without extra parameter info in the description. The description adds no additional meaning to the item_id parameter beyond its generic name.

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 ('Permanently delete') and a specific resource ('an item'), with the word 'permanently' distinguishing it from sibling tools like close_item that may imply a softer closure. This is a clear verb+resource+scope definition.

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?

No explicit guidance is provided for when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that close_item is for soft closing, nor does it note prerequisites or use cases. The 'permanently' keyword hints at context, but this is not explicit enough.

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