messages_delete

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds meaningful context beyond that: the deletion is 'for everyone,' reaches other people, may redirect data, and requires user confirmation first. These are important behavioral details not captured by structured fields.

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 front-loaded with the action and impact, followed by confirmation guidance and API reference details. Most sentences earn their place, though the middle sentence is slightly awkwardly worded.

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 mutation with three opaque required IDs and no output schema, the description covers the safety impact but says nothing about the parameters needed to invoke it correctly. An agent still lacks essential guidance on chatId, channelId, and messageId semantics.

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 all three required parameters (chatId, channelId, messageId) lack descriptions. The description does not mention or clarify any of them, so it fails to compensate for the schema gap and leaves the agent unable to distinguish their roles.

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 opening sentence states a specific verb and resource: 'Delete a message for everyone.' The scope 'for everyone' distinguishes it from related tools such as messages_update or messages_remove_reaction, and an agent can identify the action without opening the schema.

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 says to confirm with the user before invoking, which is useful operational guidance for a destructive action. However, it does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus siblings like messages_update or messages_remove_reaction, nor does it state when-not to use it.

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