Delete collection

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full transparency burden. It clearly discloses that the action is irreversible and that all associated records are destroyed, which is exactly the critical behavioral context an agent needs before invoking a destructive tool.

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?

Two short sentences deliver the essential action, scope, and irreversibility with no filler. Every sentence earns its place, and the warning is clear and prominent.

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?

With one required parameter, no output schema, and no nested objects, the description fully covers what the tool does and the consequences. Nothing needed to call it safely is missing.

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?

The input schema already covers the only parameter fully with 'Collection id or name to delete,' and schema description coverage is 100%. The description does not add new parameter-specific meaning beyond reinforcing the destructive consequence, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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'), a specific resource ('a collection'), and the full scope of the operation ('ALL of its records'). This clearly distinguishes it from record-level or content-level sibling tools such as delete_record and truncate_collection.

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 wording implies this is for intentional, whole-collection removal, especially with 'cannot be undone.' However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use it, such as pointing to truncate_collection when the collection itself should be preserved.

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