Delete a VWO draft campaign

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

The description reinforces the destructiveHint annotation by stating permanence and irreversibility. It adds user confirmation requirement, which is valuable context beyond the annotations.

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 extremely concise (two sentences) with no fluff. It front-loads the purpose and includes essential safety guidance.

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 is a destructive delete with no output schema and annotations cover safety, the description adequately informs the agent to confirm with the user. It could mention potential error states, but overall sufficient.

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 explains all parameters. The description adds no extra parameter information; it only references the list_drafts call in the schema description for draftId.

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 clearly states the tool's action (delete) and target (draft campaign) with the qualifier 'permanently'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like vwo_update_draft_campaigns by specifying deletion.

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 provides a clear safety guideline: confirm the specific draft with the user by name before calling. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, though the destructive nature is implied.

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