Delete recipe

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

Annotations already provide destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral context: permanent deletion, inclusion of comments/timeline/images, and the two-step confirmation mechanism. This goes beyond what annotations offer and does not contradict them.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the main action and consequence, and contains no redundant or unnecessary information. Every sentence earns its place.

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 deletion tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what is deleted, the permanence, and the confirmation flow. It could mention that the token is returned in the first call's output, but that is inferable from the schema. Overall, it is sufficiently complete.

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 schema already documents both parameters adequately. The description implicitly explains the confirm_token via the two-step process, but adds no new semantic detail beyond what the schema provides. Baseline of 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 clearly states the verb 'deletes' and the resource 'recipe permanently' along with associated items (comments, timeline, images). It distinguishes the tool from siblings like update_recipe or duplicate_recipe by specifying the destructive action.

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 explicit guidance on the two-step confirmation process ('call once to receive a token, then again with that token'). While it doesn't explicitly contrast with alternative tools (e.g., delete_organizer), the context of recipe deletion is clear and the confirmation requirement is a key usage guideline.

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