Delete shopping list

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description explicitly states that deletion includes 'everything on it', making the scope of destruction unambiguous. It also reveals the two-step confirmation token mechanism, which is essential behavioral context that the annotation and schema do not convey. This goes beyond the structured data and is directly actionable.

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 sentences, each packed with essential information: the destructive action and the required two-step confirmation. No filler, no repetition of schema details, and the most critical usage constraint (confirmation token) is front-loaded.

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 destructive tool with a confirmation token, the description covers the essential flow and scope. It does not mention error conditions (e.g., invalid token) or differentiate from removing items from a list, but the schema already covers parameter types. This is adequate for an AI to operate safely.

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 schema already provides 100% parameter descriptions, but the description adds the confirmation flow: 'call once to receive a token, then again with that token.' This clarifies how confirm_token is used and why the first call omits it, giving the agent practical guidance beyond static schema definitions. It adds value without redundancy.

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 opens with a precise action: "Deletes a shopping list and everything on it." This clearly identifies both the resource and the destructive scope, distinguishing it from tools that delete individual items (e.g., delete_shopping_list_items). The two-step confirmation is a distinctive detail that sets this tool apart from other delete 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 clearly implies when to use the tool (when a shopping list must be fully removed) and explains the required confirmation flow. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it, such as when only removing individual items via a sibling tool would be appropriate. This omission leaves room for an agent to overuse the destructive delete.

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