delete_document_section

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds critical context: the action is irreversible, cannot be undone, and requires user confirmation. It also instructs calling publish_document afterward,which annotations do not convey.

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 exceptionally concise, with the most important warning front-loaded. Every sentence carries meaningful safety or workflow information with no filler.

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 two-parameter destructive action with annotations already covering the destructive nature, the description fully covers what an agent needs: it warns of irreversibility, mandates user confirmation, and names the required follow-up action. No output schema is needed for a delete operation.

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%, so the parameter descriptions already fully document document_id and section_id. The tool description does not add further parameter-level 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?

Description states a specific verb ('deletes') and resource ('section from an IT Glue document') and emphasizes permanence. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_document_section, create_document_section, and list_docoment_sections.

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?

Provides explicit operational guidance: confirm with the user before invoking and call publish_document after editing. It does not explicitly contrast with update/create alternatives, but the destructive framing and publish instruction sufficiently imply the intended deletion workflow.

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