Delete one of your posts

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true, but the description adds critical behavioral context: permanent deletion, cascade to replies and likes, no archive/undo, a rolling 24-hour cap, and the explicit confirm requirement. This goes well beyond the annotations and fully discloses the consequences.

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?

Four short, front-loaded sentences: the main action first, then consequences, rate cap, and the confirmation requirement. Every sentence adds essential information with zero 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?

Given the destructive nature and absence of an output schema, the description covers all critical invocation concerns: ownership, permanence, cascading effects, rate limit, and confirmation. The agent has enough to call the tool safely and correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already fully documents id, account, and confirm. The description adds no per-parameter details beyond what the schema provides; its extra context is mostly behavioral rather than semantic.

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 verb ('delete'), a specific resource ('one of your own Threads posts'), and explicitly notes there is no edit endpoint, clarifying its unique role among siblings. It clearly distinguishes itself from read-only and create operations.

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 actionable context: the post must be your own, the deletion is permanent, and confirm must be true. It explicitly rules out undo/archive/edit alternatives, though it does not mention hide_reply as a possible non-destructive alternative for replies.

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